Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
"M" Theory proof of God??
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mongoose" data-source="post: 19492422" data-attributes="member: 23536"><p>Hold on a second. Superstring Theory, therefore God? I suppose you can interpret it as you will in such a way that it leads to God, but I doubt it deductively "prove" his existence.</p><p></p><p>That debate aside, there's still a huge debate in the physics community about whether or not this theory is actually a waste of time. I'm not particularly fond of the theory myself for reasons other than how fascinating it is, but I'm not deep enough in my physics education yet to truly mathematically analyze it for myself. I do like to joke that superstring theory is nothing more than a recruitment device for physicists. (Why, we could use the numbers so bad, they're probably willing to do anything to get people into this field!)</p><p></p><p>In effect, though, Superstring Theory can't really be "proof" of anything, because we're so unsure if it's even a valid theory!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mongoose, post: 19492422, member: 23536"] Hold on a second. Superstring Theory, therefore God? I suppose you can interpret it as you will in such a way that it leads to God, but I doubt it deductively "prove" his existence. That debate aside, there's still a huge debate in the physics community about whether or not this theory is actually a waste of time. I'm not particularly fond of the theory myself for reasons other than how fascinating it is, but I'm not deep enough in my physics education yet to truly mathematically analyze it for myself. I do like to joke that superstring theory is nothing more than a recruitment device for physicists. (Why, we could use the numbers so bad, they're probably willing to do anything to get people into this field!) In effect, though, Superstring Theory can't really be "proof" of anything, because we're so unsure if it's even a valid theory! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
"M" Theory proof of God??
Top
Bottom