Even 0, 1, 2, -1, 1/2, sqrt(2), sqrt(-1), are all entities of our imagination.
But no so fast asshole! The tree over time sprouts thorns (OF PAIN) on it's leaves, mangling the giraffes mouth in hopes of dealing sweet retribution as well as discouraging the creature from eating it.
Silly post aside, my point is that humans evolve differently than every other species on the planet in that rather than evolving our bodies we evolve our tools.
How would you explain that atoms in a plane traveling around the earth move slower, if it doesn't mean time is moving slower inside that plane?
Is the brain a part of the universe? Can a brain fully understand itself?
To me it seems as foolish to believe in this as it was foolish to believe that the earth is the center of the universe.
I think it's possible that every small atom is as big as a universe and that our universe is as small as an atom to others.
I already posted a derivation of E = mc^2.
An object in motion tends to stop? The four atoms are earth, fire, air, and water?
If time did not exist at all, nothing would move!
And for anyone that responds to PaToby, saying "God exists outside of time" and "God does not need to be created" is just a way to avoid the question.
Science, by definition, is understanding.
Well, what is "time" to you?
Do explain this statement. In which way did they understand the universe that present scientists do not?
Then, the reason for a particular God's existence is simply that the initial chaotic processes led to it by chance.
it doesn't just say "mass has lots of energy", it says "this particular amount of mass is worth almost exactly 14.595 joules of energy".
and GPS devices give inaccurate location readings if they're not calibrated for the effects of general relativity.
If there's mistake to be found, it won't be done sitting around and making up a new concept off the top of your head, it'll be done with decades of educated research and (very expensive) experimentation.
Gravity doesn't exist.
If E=mc^2 was false, the atomic bombs that were dropped on Japan would not have worked.
As for Wikipedia, I found this:
my point was that if the definition of "god" is "a thing that created everything", then by definition, god, if it existed, created itself,
then you don't believe in such a "god", because "god", by that definition, as i said, would have created itself.
If such a god also created or otherwise formed time (eg, before the creation there were no dimensions)
Question: How much acid and/or peyote have you done in your lifetime, nfq?
Even most religious people admit that the creation myth is just a metaphor.
If the universe was not created in the distant past, why did God try so hard to make it look like it was.
because such a thing would have created itself, which, under normal rules of causality, would mean that it did so before its own beginning,
and when you say that "god/life is way too big to be explained with a few little words", what is that supposed to mean?
384 kbps should be good for most applications.
"perfect" as a definition is meaningless without a secondary argument, namely one specifying in what property/aspect the definiendum is perfect.
"thing that created everything" is meaningful, but the existence of such a thing would violate causality.
if you meant "thing that created everything else", that would be too broad, since it could plausably include the big bang.
I thought there was this one guy called Satan. You know God and Satan, Good and Evil, Right and Wrong...all that.
WHAT IF SATAN IS GOD????? THINK ABOUT IT
First you said that God was defined as a perfect being. Then you said that God was defined as the being that created everything. These two definitions are not the same.
Is God a strong magentic force?
From which text?
This method can be used to prove anything to be the same as anything else. For example, apples can be used to make an apple pie, but oranges cannot. Thus apples and oranges are the same thing.
Yes. Sound is a sentient being and it needs reasons for whatever it wants to do. If it wants to go from place A to place B, it needs a reason to do so.
I'm curious: What is it that attracts sound?
Because it is too broad and vague. There's nothing to discuss about it.
Well, that is a valid definition. It unambigously defines the word "God" to mean the being that created everything, if there is such a being.
Now you're calling him "him".
What I said was that They might think that you are defending their enemies with the intent to make Them sad. But, no one can be held at fault for rightly becoming sad.
Furthermore, you are using two conflicting definitions of "God".
Humans are absolutely notorious for finding meaning in mere coincidences. Humans often reason that a coincidence was too unlikely to have occurred without a causal agent, whether that be a god, a four leaf clover, etc.
That is not a definition.
Good point! But evidence suggests that they are all false, since only 4 people had heard of him, they can't find his hometown and his execution was not written down in court records.
nfq, where did you learn everything you know about light and sound?
Since you don't believe in the Christian god, it would be unwise to defend him. The real God doesn't like traitors and He might become angry at you.
They may think that you are doing it to make Them sad.
Since God has no definition, it's really pointless to discuss it at all unless we discuss a specific definition of God.
I don't understand you. You say you are Finnish. And you say you believe in God, just not the Christian version, and you also say that there aren't enough Christians here. What religion do you believe in then? Which religion, apart from Judaism and Christianity, wants more Christians and calls their god "God"?
jesus christ this topic blows my mind
2007 years ago Jesus Christ said this: "Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not, for there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect".
And this demonstrates their sameness how?
Sound does not have such electric nor magnetic fields.
It's much more likely that all the difficulty's world records are equally valid.
Yeah. It's a well-known fact that sound, like all electromagnetic radiation, can travel in vacuum. Also, like all electromagnetic radiation, sound travels at the speed of light in vacuum.
Where, precisely, does the energy to get those molecules going at c come from?
Why believe some but not all of the article? If one part is wrong, surely the rest is as well?
Why does this phenomenon only occur for doped semiconductor material?
FYI, your hand does not go through water, it displaces water.
Now tell me why doesn't our TV tuner pick up human sound waves in addition to broadcast tv?
Tell me what frequencies do thought waves emit at?
Alright nfq, all-knowing master of the sciences, can you explain to me how it is conceivable that the theory of evolution (an incorrect theory) has withstood 150 years of scientific study?
I challenge you to name one piece of evidence that contradicts evolution.
What conceivable reason could there be behind that particular "design" choice?
If you want to explain something if electrons don't exist, explain to me why I can't hook up a battery to my penis, and make it light up?
I would love it if you can point out to me where on this diagram sound waves should lie. If the location is not on the diagram, give me the frequency and wavelenth ranges that it should correspond to.
And please tell me how you can detect/measure the electrical or magnetic component of sound (or thoughts)
Well doesn't that mean that 0.1% is not made of empty space? Sounds like more than "nothing" to me.
Are biologists wrong about evolution as well?
Oh and one last thing, I'd really love to see a list of the exact times on each level. Especially Depot which should be extremely low??
54.8 dam
43.6 facility
23.3 runway
1:01.9 surface 1
17.8 bunker 1
58.3 silo
22.6 frigate
49.3 surface 2
24.7 bunker 2
2:17.9 statue
16.5 archives
1:14.0 streets
26.2 depot
50.6 train
50.7 jungle
3:53.8 control
1:01.5 caverns
34.0 cradle
17:12It is not a force in the generally accepted sense of the word, like magnetism or the strong atomic force.
That's like saying that distance is just a mental thing and thus making any statements about distances is illogical.
Is your intuition (or, as you call it, "logic") better than other people's?
According to whose logic? Yours? Mine?
Do you have some kind of reference of this?
Yeah, things like heat, light and radio waves do not exist because the only thing which is not "nothing" is matter.
There's plenty of evidence. Claiming there's no evidence means that you would have to explain all the existing evidence as false. Can you do that?
It's not a broad question. Just explain me, for example, why a LED emits light when it's connected to a battery.