Skip to main content

Topic: The Awesomesauce with Religion (Read 121404 times)

  • Frenzie
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Administrator
The Awesomesauce with Religion
I suppose we need one of these.

Edit (20-02-2014): maybe a more positive title will make some difference? :)
  • Last Edit: 2014-02-20, 18:13:52 by Frenzie

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #450

Consciousness is simpler than hydrogen?

If you ask in earnest, then first tell me what you believe consciousness to be. Then I will tell you what I believe consciousness to be and I can clarify how it's simpler than hydrogen.

  • jseaton2311
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #451
Moreover, God is not complex, much less infinitely complex. Quite to the contrary, God is absolutely simple, and everything else is a complication of it.


How is it that you (and apparently, only you), know so much about the nature and makeup of god? 


God is simpler than hydrogen and therefore a simpler explanation.


And I suppose Chess is simpler than checkers as well.  As soon as you invoke the supernatural, you have gone into a realm of complete unknown, you merely 'think' it into simplicity in your mind and poof...it is simple.  Supernatural is a big game of "What if..." (I played this game with my young children--they have since moved on), and you only claim to know about it because it has manifested itself as "real" in your consciousness.  At any rate, you have never mentioned before that god is simpler than hydrogen or even a simpler explanation for this universe, so you must have just decided this on the spot--as with so many other things. 

One can take any seemingly complex object and break it down into its simpler parts and then those parts into even simpler parts until the big picture of the complex object is easily apparent and simple.  Science has done this with the universe, therefore, the scientific explanation is at least as simple the god explanation, but you haven't yet explained, in simple terms, how god came into being or what god consists of--other than being some wispy entity in another realm that is impossible to understand, much less explain.  I don't speak Ersi-ese, so please explain this laughably simple god to me only in simplest of terms, after all, simple things only require a simple explanation.  The universe came into being from a massively dense and hot speck that had no choice but to explode into everything we see now.  If you say god did that, then the god explanation is already vastly more complex.   :knight:  :cheers:
James J

  • jseaton2311
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #452
Consciousness is Conscious with what you are  doing .
on the other word, you know with what you are doing .


Hydrogen is too simple to know what it is doing, ergo, hydrogen is simpler than consciousness.   :knight:  :cheers:
James J

  • Belfrager
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #453


Consciousness is simpler than hydrogen?

If you ask in earnest, then first tell me what you believe consciousness to be. Then I will tell you what I believe consciousness to be and I can clarify how it's simpler than hydrogen.

Matter it's never simple, it needs at least electromagnetic forces to hold it together and stable and it subdivides in many components that constitutes it. The lowest atomic number of 1 that characterizes hydrogen doesn't mean it to be a simple thing.

I agree one must agree on consciousness definition first in order to answer the question in a well founded way. But I suppose that most of us will never agree on what consciousness is.
A matter of attitude.

  • jseaton2311
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #454
Matter it's never simple, it needs at least electromagnetic forces to hold it together and stable and it subdivides in many components that constitutes it. The lowest atomic number of 1 that characterizes hydrogen doesn't mean it to be a simple thing.


When you consider that the basic laws of nature dictate what all atomic particles must do in this universe (given the conditions), then it is pretty simple to see what is going on with hydrogen and why (basic HS physics).  Granted, the quantum world is not fully understood yet, but that doesn't mean it never will be simple to understand--we just haven't gone quite that far yet.   :knight:  :cheers:
James J

  • Sparta
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #455
i dont think Laws of nature like , Quantum ,  gravity  etc  will even exist if there is no some one that conscious enough to observe , understanding , and formulated that .

and that will need some conciousness to science if everything are just atoms that run or vibrate  in different speed .

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #456

How is it that you (and apparently, only you), know so much about the nature and makeup of god? 

Weren't you reading a book about theology? Right there someone else who knows these things.


At any rate, you have never mentioned before that god is simpler than hydrogen or even a simpler explanation for this universe, so you must have just decided this on the spot--as with so many other things. 

I never mentioned it before because you never asked. And you never asked because you assumed you knew :)


One can take any seemingly complex object and break it down into its simpler parts and then those parts into even simpler parts until the big picture of the complex object is easily apparent and simple.  Science has done this with the universe, therefore, the scientific explanation is at least as simple...

When you break stuff up, pieces are left behind. This does not make anything simpler. It only makes things messy.

Moreover, pieces do nothing to explain the whole. The whole is neat and functional before it is broken up. The mess does nothing to explain it. You only get the naive boyish feeling that you are approaching an explanation when you break stuff up, but the real explanation is in the contrary: Build something up and make it work.


...but you haven't yet explained, in simple terms, how god came into being or what god consists of--other than being some wispy entity in another realm that is impossible to understand, much less explain.  I don't speak Ersi-ese, so please explain this laughably simple god to me only in simplest of terms, after all, simple things only require a simple explanation.

Did you read the post in the mysticism thread? What was too complicated about it?

You are not even getting that god is not in another realm. God is said to be in another realm only for the purpose of easier analysis, just like when one explains electricity, one would talk about the electric field primarily and not about wires, even though electricity is always conducted through wires. Electric field is simpler than wires, ilustrated by means of a geometric plane. Too complicated?


The universe came into being from a massively dense and hot speck that had no choice but to explode into everything we see now.  If you say god did that, then the god explanation is already vastly more complex.   :knight:  :cheers:

Actually, when you say a massively dense and hot speck had no choice but to explode, then you are not explaining anything, whereas conscious willing god qualifies as some kind of explanation. What we are comparing is not a simple explanation versus a complex explanation, but a non-explanation versus an explanation. Simple or complex does not even apply here.


Granted, the quantum world is not fully understood yet, but that doesn't mean it never will be simple to understand--we just haven't gone quite that far yet.   :knight:  :cheers:

Looks like this is where our real difference lies. For me quantum mechanics is very easy and perfectly intuitive. As it's gradually becoming apparent, you use the word "simple" in the opposite sense, so no wonder that you are not understanding...

  • jseaton2311
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #457
Looks like this is where our real difference lies. For me quantum mechanics is very easy and perfectly intuitive. As it's gradually becoming apparent, you use the word "simple" in the opposite sense, so no wonder that you are not understanding...


For the love of God, why don't you explain quantum gravity, so that a theory of everything can be formulated, winning you the Nobel prize in physics and making you rich and famous?  If you don't want that, then just explain it to me and I'll do the dirty work.   :knight:  :cheers:

(Okay then, substitute the words 'easy to understand'.) 
James J

  • jseaton2311
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #458
Actually, when you say a massively dense and hot speck had no choice but to explode, then you are not explaining anything, whereas conscious willing god qualifies as some kind of explanation. What we are comparing is not a simple explanation versus a complex explanation, but a non-explanation versus an explanation. Simple or complex does not even apply here.


Then a magic pink unicorn, is as equally good and likely an explanation for this universe as any god to have created it?  In which case, there is a near endless number of explanations which is even more unsavory.  You hate science because it interferes with what you believe and because it is on the brink of a theory of everything that you won't be able to completely ignore.  I can admit a fraction of a percentage of doubt about god's nonexistence because I am only human--are you human enough to admit any doubt about god?  Not an ice cube's chance in hell of that happening--I am 100% without doubt about that (one little chink in that Don Quixote armor of yours and poof...you're a goner).   :knight:  :cheers:

James J

  • Sparta
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #459
sometimes my mind always full of What , about how  gravity Work .

isnt there any Simple equations , about how Gravity Force can attract everything that have mass.

  isnt there any Simple theory of everything ?

and isn't this funny about why we discuss  something like this , not in a thread about Science ?  :D


  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #460

Then a magic pink unicorn, is as equally good and likely an explanation for this universe as any god to have created it? 

The problem with magic pink unicorn is that it's not simple.


(Okay then, substitute the words 'easy to understand'.)

The more correct wording is 'easy for you to understand' and this is where things get weird. Every time I talk to physicists, I have to wonder at their incapacity to understand simple things. For example once upon a time a physicist began talking what a mysterious thing wave-particle duality is and how the principle of uncertainty confuses things. I then had to explain to him with common-sense examples how these principles actually make perfect sense and how, based on my own field of expertise, this is precisely the way one would expect physics to end up.

There are two points I would derive from this. First, these things are so easy for me that there's no way to guess what on earth could be complicated for you. When we isolate a specific problem, then perhaps I can explain something. Second, if you aim at a grand unified theory, physicists probably are not even realising that they already have it :)

Let's try quantum gravity that you mentioned. What exactly is problematic about it?

  • Sparta
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #461
i dont think another people  will understand something that you dont  understand . :beard:

well,

actually it is very simple .

If not understand , ask to someone
If know , explain and describe
If understand , explain or describe that in  simple language .

  • jseaton2311
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #462
Let's try quantum gravity that you mentioned. What exactly is problematic about it?


How would a theory of quantum gravity unify all know interactions in the universe into a single theory of everything (TOE)?   :knight:  :cheers:

Edit:  Is string theory a better approach to the problem than loop quantum gravity?  Why/why not? 
James J

  • Belfrager
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #463
When you consider that the basic laws of nature [...]

Basic laws of Nature have nothing of basic.

One of the problems with the atheist view that the universe it's a fruit of mere hazard, it's both to overestimate the power of hazard and underestimate the complexity of the universe, specially in what regards to the miracle of life.
There's simply no way that an hazardous process to create a stable system be it relating to material existence or to biological life. I will not even approach spiritual life.

The question about the simplicity of God (and also the simplicity of consciousness) it's that it is a wrong question. God is simultaneously both simple and complex. (maybe I differ here with ersi)
If you consider simplicity by the primordial perspective, God is the most simple cause of all. If you consider that everything in Creation it's a part of God, then God it's a complexity beyond your comprehension.


A matter of attitude.

  • Sparta
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #464
it seems that's nothing to do with atheism .

when someone yell that as the problem with atheism , or the problem with religion .
that is the real problem .

Sir, there is no rule or law in this world  to not have religion , or to not be an atheist.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

also it seems the Enemy of Human race is insanity .

insanity , will causing Ego , and Ego will causing Stupidity .

i made a simple Equation about that small Universe ( Human Mind ) .
still pre-alpha , and not sure too if that is 100% valid and legitimate


  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #465

How would a theory of quantum gravity unify all know interactions in the universe into a single theory of everything (TOE)?   :knight:  :cheers: 

Quantum gravity can be reconciled with the rest of the known interactions the way the rest of the known interactions have been reconciled with each other thus far. The procedure is this:

1. Look at the way other forces and also dimensions have been reconciled thus far, electricity was identified with magnetism, mass became to be understood as energy, space and time were unified into spacetime, particle with wave, etc.
2. Identify the features by means of which these reconciliations occurred.
3. Follow the direction in which these features lead to redefine gravity.


Edit:  Is string theory a better approach to the problem than loop quantum gravity?  Why/why not?

It's the field theory instead. The field theory breaks down at Planck scale, but this is intended. Measurements cannot enter that scale and never will because there are *neither* particles or waves there. All attempts at mechanical explanation will fail. This is simply how this universe is built. Only conceptual analysis that I outlined above can make sense of that scale. Empirical observation of it is impossible. Already the double-slit experiment should have made it clear to physicists that there will arrive a level unamenable to measurements.

And when you collect your Nobel prize, send a postcard with a nice stamp to me too. (I'm pretty sure you won't get the prize, because you most likely will not be able to write about your amazing discovery on academic level. The writing is something I won't do for you, sorry.)


The question about the simplicity of God (and also the simplicity of consciousness) it's that it is a wrong question. God is simultaneously both simple and complex. (maybe I differ here with ersi)
If you consider simplicity by the primordial perspective, God is the most simple cause of all. If you consider that everything in Creation it's a part of God, then God it's a complexity beyond your comprehension.

Yes, we differ here, but I see your point. Mysteries are pretty :)

  • Belfrager
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #466
Mysteries are pretty  :)

:lol:
and, specially, useful. Mysteries spares people a lot of work, more than they can handle it.
A matter of attitude.

  • jseaton2311
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #467
If you consider simplicity by the primordial perspective, God is the most simple cause of all. If you consider that everything in Creation it's a part of God, then God it's a complexity beyond your comprehension.


That is what is so wonderfully convenient about invoking the supernatural--you can make it do any damn thing you want or need it to do.  You can even make it up as you go along, like you just did and like Ersi does all the time.  You can wrap your supernatural god up tight with all kinds of protective layers to make it untouchable by any means, but in the end science will win out here on Earth--there is no reason to doubt this whatsoever.  Science has eroded creationism down to a 36% following which is about the number of mindless believers there probably are in any religion--god is next (he is rapidly losing ground as we speak). 
James J

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #468

That is what is so wonderfully convenient about invoking the supernatural--you can make it do any damn thing you want or need it to do.  You can even make it up as you go along, like you just did and like Ersi does all the time. 

Either learn how our statements make sense in the context of the other things we hold (and ask where you don't see how) or point out where and what anyone made anything up. This way you would yourself make sort of sense.

And there is another task you have right now: Get busy writing the scientific papers that will earn you the Nobel prize.

  • Belfrager
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #469
You can wrap your supernatural god up tight with all kinds of protective layers to make it untouchable by any means, but in the end science will win out here on Earth--there is no reason to doubt this whatsoever.

What makes you think that you defend science more, or better, than I do? I see no evidence of that, very much the contrary.
Your posts aren't a good service to science in case no one has ever told you.

The idea of a materialist atheist driven science that will eradicate God from earth it's a very marxist-leninist kind of thing, by the way... sure those are your waters? I think not... :)
A matter of attitude.

  • Sparta
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #470
even correlation does not imply causation

but Something irrational , is not always irrational .
since even Science is Created from something irrational , then Converted to something Rational .

if someone want to Rationalize , something irrational like God thingy .
At least find   the right methodes to get the right results .

  Theory of everything , is a good Clue .

It seems , something relevant to do is some effort to  make that as simple as possible .
Something is complicated , because there is no simple language to express that .


if in Physic, something Small is lighter, no need alot of energy to move it , and ofc can move faster than something bigger .

so does with language , simple language will easier to scanned then translated in Human Mind translator .

then we just need wait , someday there is coincidence , or happy accident , where someone remix that formula to a new Level  :coffee:



Complicated Theory of Everything will move Slower and harder to understand .
While Simple theory of Everything , Will move faster and easier to understand .

well, that's alot of something .   :D



  • jseaton2311
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #471
Either learn how our statements make sense in the context of the other things we hold (and ask where you don't see how) or point out where and what anyone made anything up. This way you would yourself make sort of sense.


You say that intuition is a more powerful tool than intellect and I don't entirely disagree.  For what it's worth, my intuition is telling me that belief in any type god will slowly fall by the wayside and that the more practical and real-life explanation for our existence from science will soon surpass that of the god explanation in popular opinion.  I also sense that religion will one day have to do a complete makeover in order to accommodate what science discovers--and to save itself from extinction--which will be a good thing. 

I intuit this, not only from science's rapid pace of explaining everything it touches in terms lay persons can understand, but also from my studies of theology where I see somewhat frantic theologians trying to make more room for the real-life explanations of science.  Educated people are no longer willing to believe by sheer blind faith alone, they are asking more and more difficult questions of religion and theologians realize that--either they keep up to date and relevant--or they are going to lose a large part of their flock to something else. 

Religion is confining in that it tries to restrict free thinking by telling believers not to pay attention to science--not long ago the Pope even pleaded with leading physicists & scientists to leave the question of creation alone because it is something for religion to answer and not science.  You think religion is not afraid of what science will find?  Actually, it is scared to death of science because theologians are running out of wiggle room. 

There has never been an obstacle too big or complicated for science to surmount simply because--there necessarily exists a rational real-life explanation for everything--it's just a matter of finding it and then figuring out how to prove it.  Half of science is dedicated to discovering our cosmological past and it is doing a more than adequate job of it.  In reality, all of science boils down to one gigantic global fact-finding expedition and more and more people in modern society are interested in only the facts. 

The great gift of science is that it's telling us how to think in the long term. The human species could go on for hundreds of millions of years.  Cosmological physicists have even figured out how to move Earth further from the sun so that as the sun heats up over billions of years, our descendants can move Earth.  Science is scanning the heavens to track large and dangerous asteroids that may be on a collision course with Earth.  Space science's next project is to land men on an asteroid in the event that we may need to somehow deflect an extinction level asteroid.  Science is not waiting for God to save us, science is taking steps now to preserve humankind for as long as this universe will exist.  There will always be some who will wait an eternity for god to come and grant them salvation or eternal life, but it's high time for the rest of us to 'head west, young man'. 

  • Last Edit: 2014-08-03, 16:54:52 by jseaton2311
James J

  • ersi
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #472
@JS
You are prophecying what's a long-gone past here where I live. And it cannot be that I am half a century or so ahead of time. Rather, I am on time :) But nice to revisit history every once in a while.

How are the Nobel papers going?

  • jseaton2311
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #473
Almost finished, just the conclusion to go.   :knight:  :cheers:
James J

  • jseaton2311
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: The Awesomesauce with Religion
Reply #474
You are prophecying what's a long-gone past here where I live. And it cannot be that I am half a century or so ahead of time. Rather, I am on time  :)  But nice to revisit history every once in a while.


Wow!!  I didn't know you already figured out how to move the Earth away from the sun--what's the plan to deflect large asteroids?  We could win another Nobel with this shit, (I gave you some credit for solving the TOE).   :knight:  :cheers:
James J