Sunday, April 03, 2016

One example where One explanation is no explanation

Most of us use explanation statements to justify our own version of what we see is important .If we re right thats helpful but if we are only guessing its wrong to take such statements seriously .

This is not so much the age of science as the age of science dementia- where the people think they are talking science when full equations are neither remembered , considered or computed ( my definition)
 Christians do it just like Atheists .
Its a bit rich though for atheists , being true to their own philosophy rejecting  sound questioning of the science  behind such simplicities
Stephen Meyer
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2016/03/about_a_bike_lo102722.html

Labels:


Tuesday, April 02, 2013

Getting rid of the idea of God is not easy

Its clear from western intellectual history- at least ( Take someone like Herbert Spencer or even the reactionary nature of the first humans as described in Genesis ) that non believers are always trying to get rid of the idea of God in their lives .
According to Genesis for example , this is seen to imply the objectionable idea of getting rid of the idea that God will eventually judge us.
Either way, the new idea  puts a lot of pressure on the idea of  Evolution.  Evolution is quite clearly now responsible for everything .
Somehow Evolution has, in many unbelievers minds, got God like status . Little bit hard to believe even though we can see natural selection at work and no man has ever seen God ?



I have always been in awe as a professional environmentalist at how incredibly fine tuned the things we see and work with are – well symbolised by the recent growing understanding amongst conservationists about the reality of resilience. The reality of resilience implies incredible intercell feedback loops ( something that even computers  can’t invent for themselves by chance)   
What a growing divide though still between what we know and what we would like to know. By digging deep, we have discovered some gold like constants to support our expectations about what controls the universe. I wonder what we will yet discover about how cells communicate. This growing solid base for life suggests a structure for freedom. Such an expanding knowledge base also suggests to me a growing smaller context for theories about everything - a smaller context for the process of natural selection and its importance in explaining things. 

Labels: ,


Thursday, November 08, 2012

How discoverable is the Universe?

You may think this is a ridiculous question, but many scientists and thinking people do not . I don't think they ever have - even now,  today
How does the average laymen interpret the wavering between " we do know " and "we don't know "that actually goes on in trying to answer real questions by real human beings. It seems to me that it is the modern media who like to maintain a level of confusion because amongst scientists the problem is less.

Take a step back in time and lets not presume that,  because of time , "we know more " ( this the dumb game of our age )
Shakespeare used the term disclosure ( The theme of the conference ) to highlight "the hatching thing" ( of the egg) while Spencer , it seems to me, predictably tries to dissect it into it his favourite eggshell bits  of "transforming and venting".



The Bible, it seems to me  is streets ahead of both authors because according to its authors , it is the Creator's choice alone to both disclose and to hide at the very same time and , even , in the very same space and place . Matthew  11:25 ;Luke 19:40-42.Frustratingly logical , both in theory and in practice .

Labels: , , ,


Tuesday, October 02, 2012

Trains that will string particles together



Where is all this talk of strings and particles taking us ?
Maybe a good discussion on this is limited by the political determinism that insists we are looking for a theory of everything, and therefore a fully loaded train( lots of connected strings) rather than a reality of "interfering bits" . The best writing I have seen on this makes clear that what we learn from science must be pursued with vigor but not confused with the inherently difficult job of knowing anything about why even any one of the wheels is turning on a life axle.
Its hard not to come to the conclusion that The Creator  knows what He purposed ( because all life is purposeful) ,but we may have no idea:
" the best explanations (in biology)are inspired by the principle that everything that happens as if nature proposed to attain certain ends with a strict economy of means "- E.Gilson


Labels: , , , ,


Tuesday, August 07, 2012

We are alone in the universe -if we think we are?

Whats next in exploring the universe? - the big meet ? when you meet humility you know you are home ? The Curiosity is confronted by mere aluminosilicates , the Voyager light years of empty and our place is producing food ,fantasy and fun every second .
What a great skit is this item 
.http://www.terrybisson.com/page6/page6.html











Sunday, August 05, 2012

How much of the universe is still hidden from us

Why do we humans think we will see everything there is to see ? Surely its rational to suggest that we might not ,or never may see how the particles or fields ever quite interact .So far though its a great journey through a very rationale and discoverable place.
While its great that we are pushing the boundaries of knowledge in these areas and learning how to make lasers and predict more , maybe there are limits .
While no physicists likes to be lumbered with the heavy burden that they are "looking for God ",such misplaced popular notions build the colliders and research centers that keep them in bread.

Interestingly, the science panel on ABC Big Ideas last week seemed to all being be saying that though they have just created a new particle called a boson, its all part of the hidden framework of forces that we can't see; a growing hidden but more ever present framework of neutrinos we can't see !
While i don't think its neccesarily possible to prove where the Creator is,  the present knowledge is clearly no challenge to sound old theology ( omnipresence, omniscience )
I wonder whether "god particle" is just another pathetic attempt to keep God at a distance and put him in a box ( a particle )
Modern quantum physics seems  to say everything is particles in one breath and then say everything is fields .Thank God it all works, I say.

Labels: , , , ,


Monday, December 12, 2011

Implications of An Expanding Universe

Phillip Adams desire to be honest / his sense of adventure/ prepared to be Not Politically Correct can make him compelling viewing (egABCdrum last week where he suggested only 1000 people were the backbone of the Labor party ) .
He wants us to abandon the idea of God as a force with no force .
As a scientist its clear he doesn't understand forces and how little we really know about them.
That he should, by mere choice of words and ideas, find himself increasingly alone in a expanding universe is completely rational.
I have found it far more rewarding, over many many decades , as far as adventure goes, to seek to appreciate the wonder of my companions in the periodic table and the idea of a fellow traveller who shares the space in a powerful way .
As a result I avoid those whose preoccupation and delimitation is to try and occupy the space with their view of how it all works .

Labels: , ,


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?