Physics and the Immortality of the Soul

[NailsII]

What Science tends to do is test what they believe. For me the scientific approach is a very good way to study the Bible. There is a lot in the Bible that Science can verify to be true. Even if we accept what science believes they can falsify. That gives us plenty to work with even if we do not get into a discussion of the areas that require faith.

Talk about a conflict!

You use scientific methods to study the bible, yet admit that some areas still require faith?

What would a scientist do when he finds no evidence for something?

 

[Michael]

Talk about a conflict!

You use scientific methods to study the bible, yet admit that some areas still require faith?

I don't see how that's a "conflict" actually. From my perspective (non literalism ) it's certainly possible to use science to study the Bible to figure out which parts have merit, which "interpretations" are not tenable, and yet there will still be parts (God) that will still require some amount of "faith" in something "unseen" in the lab. FYI, scientists do that ALL day EVERY day.

What would a scientist do when he finds no evidence for something?

A lot of them (not all) evidently keep promoting it anyway:

Has Our Galaxy's Dark Matter Gone Missing? | Wired Science | Wired.com

Inflation (cosmology) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A recurrent criticism of inflation is that the invoked inflation field does not correspond to any known physical field, and that its potential energy curve seems to be an ad hoc contrivance to accommodate almost any data we could get. It is significant that Paul J. Steinhardt, one of the founding fathers of inflationary cosmology, has recently become one of its sharpest critics. He calls ‘bad inflation’ a period of accelerated expansion whose outcome conflicts with observations, and ‘good inflation’ one compatible with them: “Not only is bad inflation more likely than good inflation, but no inflation is more likely than either. … Roger Penrose considered all the possible configurations of the inflaton and gravitational fields. Some of these configurations lead to inflation … Other configurations lead to a uniform, flat universe directly –without inflation. Obtaining a flat universe is unlikely overall. Penrose’s shocking conclusion, though, was that obtaining a flat universe without inflation is much more likely than with inflation –by a factor of 10 to the googol (10 to the 100) power!”[98]

 

[mzungu]

 

[AV1611VET]

No, you teach children how to walk; thinking comes naturally.

 

[Guy1]

No, you teach children how to walk; thinking comes naturally.

You're evidence that it does not.

 

[AV1611VET]

You're evidence that it does not.

... That's funny!

 

[mzungu]

No, you teach children how to walk; thinking comes naturally.

In my school,we were always reminded that: "You are not here to learn but to learn how to learn".

One who is not inquisitive and does not question. One who accepts on blind faith alone; Achieves only to hinder truth.

 

[Guy1]

In the case of Lyell he went looking for evidence to show something wrong. In the case of a 6,000 year earth there is plenty of evidence to show the earth is 4.5 billion years old.

Which is how science goes about doing things. Get an idea, then mercilessly try to disprove it.

When it comes to Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden there is plenty of evidence to show that there was a unique biodiversity ecology in the middle east.

Source?

There is plenty of DNA evidence to show that the generations in the Bible could be true just like the Bible says.

Source?

If there was no Garden in Eden. If there was no Adam and Eve, then science should be able to show that they did not exist.

Absence of evidence is evidence of absence. The fact that there is no evidence of them is in itself evidence that they do not exist.

As it is the DNA evidence tends to show they did exist. Adam most likly had what they call the Cohen Gene. It is believed that the Cohen's were descended from Aaran, Moses brother.

Source?

 

[NailsII]

Who said God can do "anything"? There are lots that God can not do. He can not lie, cheat or steal for example. It is not in His nature. Although the Devil does seem to be the exact opposite. All he does is lie, cheat and steal. He is the father of that.

Have you any evidence that the devil has done anything wrong, even a biblical citation?

"DNA needs 32 atoms to store one bit" Just do a google search. Clearly you have not researched any of this at all.

Wrong.
You would need six bases to make a 3-base codon and its complimentary strand, and this is going to need more than 32 atoms.

In the case of Lyell he went looking for evidence to show something wrong. In the case of a 6,000 year earth there is plenty of evidence to show the earth is 4.5 billion years old. In the case of Noah's flood there is plenty of evidence to show that his flood was local and not world wide.

You need to provide some evidence that Noah was a real person.

When it comes to Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden there is plenty of evidence to show that there was a unique biodiversity ecology in the middle east. There is plenty of DNA evidence to show that the generations in the Bible could be true just like the Bible says.

I think you just made that up.

If there was no Garden in Eden. If there was no Adam and Eve, then science should be able to show that they did not exist. As it is the DNA evidence tends to show they did exist. Adam most likly had what they call the Cohen Gene. It is believed that the Cohen's were descended from Aaran, Moses brother.

You really are making this stuff up as you go along.
Science has pinpointed a genetic Eve and a genetic Adam, they are two individuals who are the parents of all humanity.
They lived at different times, quite possibly in different places - and you are out by a factor of about 10, as they didn't live 6,000 years ago.
They were unremarkable in their time, it just so happens that their peers have not left any living relatives.

No, you teach children how to walk; thinking comes naturally.

I think you will find that children learn to walk by themselves, they just copy.

 

[AV1611VET]

Google is your friend. I am not here to spoon feed people. How difficult is it to type "Middle East Biodiversity" into a google search? I try to give you all key words to make a google search easy. I want people to be able to verify everything I say.

Remember my shopping cart analogy?

 

[Guy1]

Google is your friend. I am not here to spoon feed people. How difficult is it to type "Middle East Biodiversity" into a google search? I try to give you all key words to make a google search easy. I want people to be able to verify everything I say.

People on here spoon feed you constantly. Now get to searching.

 

[AV1611VET]

no, I do not remember, what were you shopping for?

QV please:

You guys are like the proverbial kid being pushed through the aisle in a shopping cart by his mother, whining, "I want this! I want that!" And the mother says, "No", and then... well ... then the whine-vent-ridicule triad starts.

 

[Guy1]

Yep, thats pretty much it. I will be the first to admit that I wish God spoiled us and did it all for us. But that is not reality. He expects us to put a little bit of effort into seeking after Him. We can not do for others what they should be doing for themselves.

Says the guy who needed someone else to pull 86,100 articles on the Cambrian Explosion for him.

 

[mkatzwork]

Apparently you missed my point ENTIRELY. Someone (can't recall off the top of my head and I'm too lazy to look at the moment) asked how much a "soul weighted". My point in asking how much a graviton weighed was to point out that some theoretical particles do not HAVE a proposed weight. I think I mentioned the photon as well. You're the one that went all ballistic.

Weight does NOT equal mass. The point in asking how much a graviton weighs is that it is a silly question that doesn't even serve to make the point you were trying to make.

If you were trying to make that point, you should have said "what is the mass of a graviton?". I think you're confusing weight and mass, a common confusion made by those with little actual study of more advanced physics under their belt; or if not confusing, not caring enough to make the distinction or be correct.

Likewise nobody says soul MUST exist, the concept simply jives with NDE's and even some reported past life memories. Whatever the field might be made of, it need not have any rest mass as we understand it, anymore than a photon has rest mass. Rest mass isn't even a requirement for something to be "real"!

So you're saying it's ok to suggest soul particles as a concept because "they jive" with anecdotal evidence alone, yet to suggest gravitons as a concept is tantamount to "religion" or "mythology", because they fit a mathematic model quite well that in many other respects describes the natural world exactly as we see it?

Maybe we should find some more anecdotal evidence to try and convince you when next a cosmological principle arises on these forums, because it seems to be something you treasure.

Quantum field theory, of which the graviton is merely a logical extension, has a great deal of empirical support. Three of the four forces seem to be tied inextricably each to an elementary particle, so why is it "mythology" and a "religion" to suppose that the fourth might be, also?

It's only because gravitons are so catastrophically beyond measurement in even their best case postulated form (although - let's be crystal clear - not prohibited from measurement and still entirely testable, just way beyond anything we can currently build) - that the experiments are primarily designed to infer their presence and properties, and rule out other possibilities (via gravitational waves).

 

[Michael]

Weight does NOT equal mass. The point in asking how much a graviton weighs is that it is a silly question that doesn't even serve to make the point you were trying to make.

Whatever. I seems like a silly and unrelated issue at this point.

If you were trying to make that point, you should have said "what is the mass of a graviton?". I think you're confusing weight and mass, a common confusion made by those with little actual study of more advanced physics under their belt; or if not confusing, not caring enough to make the distinction or be correct.

Or it was just sloppy verbiage which you decided to build a federal case over.

So you're saying it's ok to suggest soul particles as a concept because "they jive" with anecdotal evidence alone, yet to suggest gravitons as a concept is tantamount to "religion" or "mythology", because they fit a mathematic model quite well that in many other respects describes the natural world exactly as we see it?

Let me back up here and point out that I don't really take issue over QM concepts. Granted, some of the proposed particles and concepts aren't easily "testable" at the moment, but it's not like they wouldn't exist here on Earth were we to have the technology to test such ideas at the moment. More importantly these ideas (as you noted) came from rigorous empirical testing here on Earth. It's not exactly something I'd call a "religion", but I would say it includes an element of "faith" in the unseen, in the lab.

Compare and contrast that with the now dead inflation sky deity.

Maybe we should find some more anecdotal evidence to try and convince you when next a cosmological principle arises on these forums, because it seems to be something you treasure.

Ya know....Had Guth really had some sort of scientific precedent, some principle or field that had some sort of "history" prior the one man, his ideas wouldn't actually seem so "contrived". It's the fact that inflation theory came from one single human imagination that makes it somewhat hard to see as anything other than a "religious icon" of sorts. Guth's sky icon just included some math, and ideas that ultimately were falsified. None the less, the "icon without precedent" somehow managed to live beyond a single falsification. That's when it finally morphed it dozens of metaphysical 'religions".

Quantum field theory, of which the graviton is merely a logical extension, has a great deal of empirical support.

Indeed. Many of QM's ideas are testable here on Earth, right now.

Three of the four forces seem to be tied inextricably each to an elementary particle, so why is it "mythology" and a "religion" to suppose that the fourth might be, also?

It's not a religion, but it's still an act of "faith" on the part of the "believer" in the unseen (in the lab).

It's only because gravitons are so catastrophically beyond measurement in even their best case postulated form (although - let's be crystal clear - not prohibited from measurement and still entirely testable, just way beyond anything we can currently build) - that the experiments are primarily designed to infer their presence and properties, and rule out other possibilities (via gravitational waves).

It's the concept of POTENTIAL empirical support that keeps me from suggesting that gravitons are a "religion". Unlike the now dead inflation sky entity, the parts of QM we cannot yet test on Earth, may yet one day be TESTABLE here on Earth. I suppose that's the only empirical difference between a simple act of faith in the unseen, and a full blown "religion' that will necessarily and forever be an act of faith (like inflation).

 

[createdtoworship]

why the soul is eternal and why hell must be as well

The soul is software not hardware. And if it is software it has no mass....

the weight of an empty floppy disk is .8 ounce. But a completely full one is still .8 ounce. Software has no mass, but controls the way the machine operates.

The mass of the floppy disk is .8 ounce, and will remain .8 ounce regardless of whether its individual magnetic particles are charged in a positive or negative manner. It's the pattern of neg (0) and pos (1) polarity of the existing particles already on the disk that make up what we call "software", not whether the disk is empty (which it is not) or full (also, which it is not)

the soul is just the software of the human body...it's information in the neurons

all non-material entities (e.g. information,
consciousness, intelligence and will) are massless and thus
have zero weight. Information is always based on an idea;
it is thus also massless and does not arise from physical
or chemical processes.

secondly,
time is the fourth dimension (a physical property)

time varies with mass, acceleration, and gravity. For a person travelling at 99% the speed of light, Time slows for them by a factor of 7 If they were to travel to a star 7 light years away, at 99% speed of light, it would take them 1 year, but to an observer on Earth it would have seemed like 7 years.

Time needs mass to operate, because time varies with mass, acceleration, and gravity.

so since the soul has no mass, the soul is outside of time (space time=space or volume/mass + time)

By default the soul HAS to be eternal.

Hell must be eternal as well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tulJnR5siYs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7M6LqEAukg

 

[mzungu]

why the soul is eternal and why hell must be as well

The soul is software not hardware. And if it is software it has no mass....

the weight of an empty floppy disk is .8 ounce. But a completely full one is still .8 ounce. Software has no mass, but controls the way the machine operates.

The mass of the floppy disk is .8 ounce, and will remain .8 ounce regardless of whether its individual magnetic particles are charged in a positive or negative manner. It's the pattern of neg (0) and pos (1) polarity of the existing particles already on the disk that make up what we call "software", not whether the disk is empty (which it is not) or full (also, which it is not)

the soul is just the software of the human body...it's information in the neurons

all non-material entities (e.g. information,
consciousness, intelligence and will) are massless and thus
have zero weight. Information is always based on an idea;
it is thus also massless and does not arise from physical
or chemical processes.

secondly,
time is the fourth dimension (a physical property)

time varies with mass, acceleration, and gravity. For a person travelling at 99% the speed of light, Time slows for them by a factor of 7 If they were to travel to a star 7 light years away, at 99% speed of light, it would take them 1 year, but to an observer on Earth it would have seemed like 7 years.

Time needs mass to operate, because time varies with mass, acceleration, and gravity.

so since the soul has no mass, the soul is outside of time (space time=space or volume/mass + time)

By default the soul HAS to be eternal.

So how is a fertilized human egg any different to a lizard, chimp, severely mentally h@ndicapped human, etc. ad infinitum? Don't they all have this massless software so that they may function?

Now here is the GRAND CHALLENGE:
You can make up anything you want in your make believe world but how about showing us the CODE for this SOUL SOFTWARE then

 

[createdtoworship]

So how is a fertilized human egg any different to a lizard, chimp, severely mentally h@ndicapped human, etc. ad infinitum? Don't they all have this massless software so that they may function?

Now here is the GRAND CHALLENGE:
You can make up anything you want in your make believe world but how about showing us the CODE for this SOUL SOFTWARE then

they too would have a soul, but only God can write or erase the code. I believe He erases codes of animals when they die. (but it is hypothetically possible that kittens would go to heaven, I just don't believe so)

secondly, the reason why we wouldnot see the code, is because it is massless.

 

[NailsII]

why the soul is eternal and why hell must be as well

The soul is software not hardware. And if it is software it has no mass....

the weight of an empty floppy disk is .8 ounce. But a completely full one is still .8 ounce. Software has no mass, but controls the way the machine operates.

The mass of the floppy disk is .8 ounce, and will remain .8 ounce regardless of whether its individual magnetic particles are charged in a positive or negative manner. It's the pattern of neg (0) and pos (1) polarity of the existing particles already on the disk that make up what we call "software", not whether the disk is empty (which it is not) or full (also, which it is not)

the soul is just the software of the human body...it's information in the neurons

all non-material entities (e.g. information,
consciousness, intelligence and will) are massless and thus
have zero weight. Information is always based on an idea;
it is thus also massless and does not arise from physical
or chemical processes.

secondly,
time is the fourth dimension (a physical property)

time varies with mass, acceleration, and gravity. For a person travelling at 99% the speed of light, Time slows for them by a factor of 7 If they were to travel to a star 7 light years away, at 99% speed of light, it would take them 1 year, but to an observer on Earth it would have seemed like 7 years.

Time needs mass to operate, because time varies with mass, acceleration, and gravity.

so since the soul has no mass, the soul is outside of time (space time=space or volume/mass + time)

By default the soul HAS to be eternal.

Hell must be eternal as well.

they too would have a soul, but only God can write or erase the code. I believe He erases codes of animals when they die. (but it is hypothetically possible that kittens would go to heaven, I just don't believe so)

secondly, the reason why we wouldnot see the code, is because it is massless.

So you are going to use science to tell us that science cannot show whether a soul exists or not.

Sounds to me like someone is just making this stuff up as they go along (not you personally, as you have linked to where you got the info from )

Bottom line - the soul looks exactly the same whether it is beyond time or non-existant. You have failed to show why it could be a completely made-up concept, and that could be why there is no evidence for it.

 

[Elias526]

the weight of an empty floppy disk is .8 ounce. But a completely full one is still .8 ounce.

Don't you burn a disk? That means the weight should be less because you vaporized some of the disk.