Religion II

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

boxcar rests on the idea that there must have been a supreme creator because "the universe could not have created itself." The law of non-contradiction.

However, it turns out that science has some ideas about this.

"In the 1980s, the cosmologist Alex Vilenkin at Tufts University in Massachusetts came up with a mechanism through which the laws of quantum mechanics could have generated an inflating universe from a state in which there was no time, no space and no matter. There’s an established principle in quantum theory that pairs of particles can spontaneously, momentarily pop out of empty space. Vilenkin took this notion a step further, arguing that quantum rules could also enable a minuscule bubble of space itself to burst into being from nothing, with the impetus to then inflate to astronomical scales. Our cosmos could thus have been burped into being by the laws of physics alone. To Vilenkin, this result put an end to the question of what came before the Big Bang: nothing."

Maybe the universe creating itself isn't so far fetched after all.

Ahh yes...the "brilliant" theory that from Nothing comes Something. But wait -- Particles of what? Particles of matter? From whence come these particles? If these particles "popped" into existence, then what caused them to do so? Does not the Law of Causality require that anything that has come into existence has been caused?

And I bet you thought that the high priests of scientism weren't avid practitioners of black magic, hey?

[hcap]

First mover is nothing?

Reality of the Casimir effect. Measurable and an actual demonstration of creation occuring from nothingness.

Researchers harness mysterious Casimir force for tiny devices
April 20, 2017

This energy, predicted seven decades ago by the Dutch scientist Hendrik Casimir, arises from quantum effects and can be seen experimentally by placing two opposing plates very close to each other in a vacuum. At close range, the plates repel each other, which could be useful to certain technologies. Until recently, however, harnessing this "Casimir force" to do anything useful seemed impossible.

A new silicon chip built by researchers at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology and Princeton University is a step toward harnessing the Casimir force. Using a clever assembly of micron-sized shapes etched into the plates, the researchers demonstrated that the plates repel as they are brought close together. Constructing this device entirely out of a single silicon chip could open the way to using the Casimir force for practical applications such as keeping tiny machine parts from sticking to each other. The work was published in the February issue of the journal Nature Photonics.

Energy of a vacuum

"This is among the first experimental verifications of the Casimir effect on a silicon chip," said Alejandro Rodriguez, an assistant professor of electrical engineering at Princeton University, who provided theoretical calculations for the device, which was built by a team led by Ho Bun Chan at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. "And it also allows you to make measurements of forces in very nontrivial structures like these that cause repulsion. It is a double-whammy."


Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2017-04-harnes...vices.html#jCp

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

I thought Aquinas was a theologian and philosopher...

A man of his times not aware of what we have discovered today. No wonder he is your hero. My other posts as well as HalvOnHorseracing's indicate Aquinas is done for..

You use your computer, gps and internet ignorant of quantum theory and just how that changes our understanding of reality.

Just a matter of time until quantum computing revolutionizes modern technology. (Of course you would have to admit we can measure time in nano-and below seconds to understand this)

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

A man of his times not aware of what we have discovered today. No wonder he is your hero. My other posts as well as HalvOnHorseracing's indicate Aquinas is done for..

You use your computer, gps and internet ignorant of quantum theory and just how that changes our understanding of reality.

Just a matter of time until quantum computing revolutionizes modern technology. (Of course you would have to admit we can measure time in nano-and below seconds to understand this)

For you info, learned philosophers don't have to have degrees in any science discipline. Learn the differences between science and philosophy -- and then pass your knowledge on to the Hawkings of this world who continually embarrass themselves when they try to wax intelligent and informed in a discipline in which they know nothing. (For example, Halv's scientist who believes nothing caused particles' existence.)

[hcap]

Box, you costantly ignore practical demonstrations of what works and doesn't work. The way things work is an important topic. I hold 2 U.S Patents and used to do my own patent searches. I do not have a background in theoretical sciences but recognize any invention or scheme cannot break demonstrated physical laws.

At one point I was trying to develop an infinitely variable automotive transmission and attempted a mechanical non-hydraulic approach. Hydraulic torque converters are notoriously inefficient.

While doing a search on my own idea in the DC patent office (circa 1976), came across a bunch of inventions filed by a group of inventors from Santiago Chile. Weird and their stuff was primarily based on gyroscopes and their mistaken notion that a gyroscope would fix itself in position resisting ALL reactive forces. Sounded good at first glance and it theoretically solved reactive fluid dynamic losses in torque converters. Unfortunately they ignored gyroscopic precession and I soon realized that if their theoretical conjecture would work, they were in fact a short theoretical jump away from a perpetual notion machine.

So the article I posted about the Casmir effect chip seems to be a another practical application of quantum theory and a demonstration of the reality of virtual particles occurring without a "first cause"

Ironically the Casmir effect is NOT a practical demonstration of free energy that some attributed to it early on, and not like those guys in Santiago's gyroscopic perpetual motion machines.

Btw, you often devise perpetual motion theistic schemes that as I mentioned remind me of Rube Goldberg

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

For you info, learned philosophers don't have to have degrees in any science discipline. Learn the differences between science and philosophy -- and then pass your knowledge on to the Hawkings of this world who continually embarrass themselves when they try to wax intelligent and informed in a discipline in which they know nothing.

Let me get this right . Hawking embarrasses himself and you don't? No wonder you don't want to post a link to your absurd 11 part treatise where you have stated space cannot exist without matter defining it

(For example, Halv's scientist who believes nothing caused particles' existence.)

As I do and have posted multiple times on the same topic..

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

Let me get this right . Hawking embarrasses himself and you don't? No wonder you don't want to post a link to your absurd 11 part treatise where you have stated space cannot exist without matter defining it

Hey, Mr. Illiterate, I told you a few days ago that I don't have any links to any of my posts. So, why should I do your work for you? If you're so curious about those posts, remove your fingers from off your lazy butt and let those fingers find those posts.

As I do and have posted multiple times on the same topic..

You'd believe anything that is absurd and think it disproves God.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

First mover is nothing?

Reality of the Casimir effect. Measurable and an actual demonstration of creation occuring from nothingness.

Researchers harness mysterious Casimir force for tiny devices
April 20, 2017

This energy, predicted seven decades ago by the Dutch scientist Hendrik Casimir, arises from quantum effects and can be seen experimentally by placing two opposing plates very close to each other in a vacuum. At close range, the plates repel each other, which could be useful to certain technologies. Until recently, however, harnessing this "Casimir force" to do anything useful seemed impossible.

A new silicon chip built by researchers at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology and Princeton University is a step toward harnessing the Casimir force. Using a clever assembly of micron-sized shapes etched into the plates, the researchers demonstrated that the plates repel as they are brought close together. Constructing this device entirely out of a single silicon chip could open the way to using the Casimir force for practical applications such as keeping tiny machine parts from sticking to each other. The work was published in the February issue of the journal Nature Photonics.

Energy of a vacuum

"This is among the first experimental verifications of the Casimir effect on a silicon chip," said Alejandro Rodriguez, an assistant professor of electrical engineering at Princeton University, who provided theoretical calculations for the device, which was built by a team led by Ho Bun Chan at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. "And it also allows you to make measurements of forces in very nontrivial structures like these that cause repulsion. It is a double-whammy."


Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2017-04-harnes...vices.html#jCp

So...this fantastic experiment that this Dutchman performed was conducted with something or conducted with nothing?

[hcap]

Read what people other than you post.
Till then you come across as a pathetic joke

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

Read what people other than you post.
Till then you come across as a pathetic joke

It's you and the godless scientists who are pathetic! This Dutchman conducted an experiment using something(s), presumably Got a certain result that he then credited to nothing as producing it! It's no wonder Solomon wrote thousands of years ago that insanity is in the hearts of sinners throughout their lives! Your mad scientists have never discovered the "evil of folly and the foolishness of madness" (Eccl 7:25).

[dnlgfnk]

Originally Posted by hcap

Did Aquinas ever imagine quantum mechanics?

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...particles-rea/

Virtual particles are indeed real particles. Quantum theory predicts that every particle spends some time as a combination of other particles in all possible ways. These predictions are very well understood and tested.

Quantum mechanics allows, and indeed requires, temporary violations of conservation of energy, so one particle can become a pair of heavier particles (the so-called virtual particles), which quickly rejoin into the original particle as if they had never been there. If that were all that occurred we would still be confident that it was a real effect because it is an intrinsic part of quantum mechanics, which is extremely well tested, and is a complete and tightly woven theory--if any part of it were wrong the whole structure would collapse.

Casimir effect

Here is a physical experiment that potentially demonstrates "creation" continuing to happen all around us.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_effect



Casimir forces on parallel plates

Afternoon, hcap.

Essentially, "virtual particles illustrate creation from nothing because of Quantum States."

Quantum states, vacuums, the laws of physics, etc., are not "nothing". To argue otherwise is to become a philosopher and metaphysician...

https://phys.org/news/2014-08-what-is-nothing.html

This is why anything trotted out in empirical science does not undermine metaphysics and the philosophy of nature for Scholastics. A precondition for any possible material world that can be studied, is that the philosophy of nature tells them what the natural world must be like, regardless of how physics describes it. The distinction between act and potency (motion/change), the principle of causality, etc.

"Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist."

Um, Stephen (Hawking), like the number "0", an empty box or my empty bank account, the law of gravity is something. Terrific scientist. Philosopher--not so much.

[dnlgfnk]

Originally Posted by hcap

Western religions proposing pie in the sky deities relying in part on middle ages first mover thinking instead of the study of the mind, as many eastern beliefs do, have been knocking on the wrong doors particularly in the modern era.

Deity
Shmeity.

Man's mind unable to drop man's own presumptuous forced intellectual theories can only understand the "divine" as an external golden calf. The great mystics may have been experiencing and writing about primarily the non-external.

However my own limited direct discoveries sort of point to some sort of corresponding external principle.


This is a concept that transcends the typical "figuring out". Yes I am very much STILL stuck in this, but occasionally am not.

Your not the only one with limited, but direct discoveries.

We can all be condescending. I view the attraction to the East by Westerners, in part, as the lure to be chic, contrarian, anti-authority, untraditional, and a few other descriptions.

You'll state that I'm ignorant of your motivations. Then again, you had to google the word for the central description of the inner dynamic between the Persons of the Trinity within Christianity's central doctrine.

"Oneness" or duality. The embrace of, or the escape from suffering. It's more than presumptuous force that leads me to believe that the indescribable love for my wife and children may just be eternal, and them as well, rather than extinguished.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by dnlgfnk

Afternoon, hcap.

Essentially, "virtual particles illustrate creation from nothing because of Quantum States."

Quantum states, vacuums, the laws of physics, etc., are not "nothing". To argue otherwise is to become a philosopher and metaphysician...

https://phys.org/news/2014-08-what-is-nothing.html

This is why anything trotted out in empirical science does not undermine metaphysics and the philosophy of nature for Scholastics. A precondition for any possible material world that can be studied, is that the philosophy of nature tells them what the natural world must be like, regardless of how physics describes it. The distinction between act and potency (motion/change), the principle of causality, etc.

"Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist."

Um, Stephen (Hawking), like the number "0", an empty box or my empty bank account, the law of gravity is something. Terrific scientist. Philosopher--not so much.

Doc, I read the article in the above link. Nothing never existed and never will. Nothing has never existed because God is not "no thing"; and He has always existed. Nothing can co-exist with Something.

[Actor]

For motion is nothing else than the reduction of something from potentiality to actuality.

Upon starting this series of posts I considered making a request that all questions and comments be withheld until after I had finished addressing all 12 sentences. I decided against it because I thought such a request would be ignored. I am now faced with the choice between responding immediately to questions and comments or waiting until I'm done with all 12 sentences. I choose the latter since I am certain that the other option would lead to a series of digressions which would, in turn, threaten the completion of the series. To paraphrase the bard "Patience ... I will be faithful."


The buzz words in this sentence are "potentiality" and "actuality." I take potentiality to mean "potential energy" and actuality, "kinetic energy."

In every first year physics course the student is presented with this problem (or its equivalent). Galileo drops a 1 kg weight from a 100 meter tower. How fast will the weight be traveling when it hits the ground? The solution the student is expected to arrive at, and the one the teacher accepts, involves a simplifying assumption that the mass of the earth is effectively infinity, thus the student ignores the effect of the weight's gravitational attraction on the earth and only considers the effect of the earth's gravitational attraction on the weight. This is not the case.

Thus, in his third sentence Aquinas continues his fallacious reasoning. What has "potentiality" and what is "actuality" depends entirely on one's choice of frame of reference. Relativity clearly proves that all frames of reference are equal; the is no privileged frame. Like the student who ignores the effect of the weight's mass, Aquinas concentrates on the specific while ignoring the general.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by Actor

The buzz words in this sentence are "potentiality" and "actuality." I take potentiality to mean "potential energy" and actuality, "kinetic energy."

You may want to understand "potentiality" and actuality" per your definition. Your definition is incorrect. They are terms of art and have nothing to do with nomenclature or definitions per physics.

However, if you want construct all the straw-man arguments you need to make you feel better.