How do you disprove physics?

Discussion in 'Philosophy and Religion' started by AceK, Jul 8, 2014.

  1. AceK

    AceK Scientia Potentia Est

    Messages:
    7,824
    Likes Received:
    958
    Religion is a matter of faith, you must believe no matter what, even in the face of vast amounts of evidence that would otherwise discredit your ideas. Scientfic ideas are reasoned, and then the data is collected to prove (or disprove) these ideas correct. Nothing is assumed to be true, a hypothesis must be tested and retested before it is assumed correct, but even so, if later data becomes available that proves it incorrect then it must be accepted so. If the experiment cannot be repeated with the same results, then there are additional unknown variables/factors that must be isolated and tested.

    The data speaks, whether the proof is what we would like to be so or not, through reasoning the data can be used to prove or disprove a hypothesis and science never settles for what we know, nor decides that we know enough, that we need not seek further knowledge and just to accept what we know, and what we don't as all that there is, or can be.

    How do you use religion to disprove science? Certainly everything we have learned about the universe in the past century or so must be wrong. The great minds of the century must be/have been incredibly misguided and all the great ideas can be chalked up to insanity. The data that has since been collected, and the evidence that has since come forth, much of which was not available when the theories were conceived but now leads to a better understanding, and more positive correlation that our hypotheses have been on the right track toward the truth all along .. what is there to say of this subject. Is our intelligence and ability to reason just incredibly distorted today, and the ancient people millenia ago actually knew everything that has been, is, and will be and anything else must be wrong, since there is no further knowledge. Was all that can be known, already known long before? And how do you know this to be true, despite going in the opposite direction of reason?
     
  2. Moonglow181

    Moonglow181 Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    16,175
    Likes Received:
    4,916
    I don't kniow, but I try to go forth with some kind of happy song in my heart....even if it is stumbling and falling sometimes.....I hope we learn more in our lifetimes about everything there is to know.....or closer to knowing......who knows.....lol

    starting to sound like a song.....a happy song, I hope. :)
     
  3. MeatyMushroom

    MeatyMushroom Juggle Tings Proppuh

    Messages:
    2,489
    Likes Received:
    193
    I'd say there's a difference between faith and belief.

    Faith is the ultimate sacrifice. It's a complete devotion to an idea or concept and is possibly the most beautiful thing life has to offer, as the weight of an individual's entire existence hangs on a moment lighter than breath.

    Belief is the crude, but necessary, complementary of faith. There is generally no substance behind the thought, other than the fact that the idea exists and has been stated to be so.


    Science, as much as I tend to insult it, is badass.. but to claim it as the only truth is to completely undermine the entire foundation of what makes science science and not religion. Doing so is about as useful to the individual as writing an in depth review of Desperate Housewives.. albeit a little more interesting.
     
  4. Monkey Boy

    Monkey Boy Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,908
    Likes Received:
    391
    I would equate belief with a goal. If someone has a belief that something will happens it's the same as someone believing that something will occur in their life against the odds. If someone tries long enough eventually it will happen.
     
  5. themnax

    themnax Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,694
    Likes Received:
    4,465
    disprove physics? why would you want to? i'm not sure i understand what the op is talking about.

    i know that no matter what else there is or isn't, it is up to us to avoid causing harm, and you cannot avoid causing harm by denying reason.

    real science never claims to be absolute and final. simply the most verified knowledge we have at any given point in time. unlike beliefs, it can and does correct itself as it goes along, as more and better evidence becomes available.

    this is the honesty that faith denies. so again i'm really puzzled, what would be the point in denying this. what point is there even remotely supposed to be in doing so.

    you don't have to deny anything to be nice to friendly little invisible things. or even big ones that wish us well and aren't at war with anything.

    i think fanatics are just people who want to create conflict where there is none, to make excuses for their own illogical ego.

    and i don't believe that is the will of any god either, however many or powerful of them might happen to exist.

    sorry, this question simply fails to make any kind of sense what so ever.
     
  6. Irminsul

    Irminsul Valkyrie

    Messages:
    62
    Likes Received:
    104
    I do not like science. Science is but an organised system of ignorance. It teaches the individual to close their minds to religious doctrines and to expand their minds on systematic calculations and possibilities with almost zero concrete evidence. It's all imagination and hypothesis. I will not put blind faith into a bunch of assumptions.
     
  7. themnax

    themnax Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,694
    Likes Received:
    4,465
    you are simply condemning something you do not understand, and for what reason beyond your own ego and to make excuses for it. everything you've said here contradicts itself.
     
    2 people like this.
  8. MeatyMushroom

    MeatyMushroom Juggle Tings Proppuh

    Messages:
    2,489
    Likes Received:
    193
    Ignorance is a funny word.. by calling someone ignorant you throw yourself down that same hole.

    Don't headbutt the table ;D
     
  9. Irminsul

    Irminsul Valkyrie

    Messages:
    62
    Likes Received:
    104
    I don't understand what nobody understands. Nothing to be ashamed of there.
     
  10. AceK

    AceK Scientia Potentia Est

    Messages:
    7,824
    Likes Received:
    958
    themnax:
    i wouldn't want to. science is the pursuit of knowledge and understanding. I started the thread because i seek others views on the this, can religion and science both be true?

    Irminsul:
    so you believe real observation is imaginary, or delusion? In your opinion, where should we get our data, to learn about the world?


    for those with faith, how do you explain the things science has made clear? religion and science seem to be contradictory to each other, but is it possible for both philosophies to coexist without one invalidating the other?
     
  11. Deranged

    Deranged Senor Member

    Messages:
    4,038
    Likes Received:
    98
    By improving disphysics
     
    1 person likes this.
  12. MeatyMushroom

    MeatyMushroom Juggle Tings Proppuh

    Messages:
    2,489
    Likes Received:
    193
    Accurate observations of the way matter interacts with itself.


    And yes.

    [​IMG]

    One side without the other would not make a circle.
     
  13. Tyrsonswood

    Tyrsonswood Senior Moment Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    34,218
    Likes Received:
    26,293
    I think it's easier for physics to disprove you than you to disprove physics...
     
    2 people like this.
  14. Irminsul

    Irminsul Valkyrie

    Messages:
    62
    Likes Received:
    104
    I meant like, let's use I dunno, dark energy for example. The last time I took any interest in dark energy it was a hypothesis that it had to exist or else things didn't make sense to scientists. So everybody interested in the universe and science started talking about this "dark energy" that couldn't be seen and couldn't be proven even existed. But it had to be there, full-stop, because science says so. It's like if something is theoretically possible then all the arms go to the air and a strong belief in it is established and I think that's bullshit. It's imagination that could be possible, but so is the imagination of religion, yet that's too imaginary you know? It's silly to believe in a god but totally plausible to believe in worm holes and time machines and extra dimensions etc. Cannot really prove any of it, it's just theoretically possible.

    Personally I don't really know what to believe in anymore so I stick with my cultural influences that best make me up as a person.

    Where should we get our data? I'm not really sure, but I don't think we should be getting it from unproven hypothesis and that's what really bugs me mostly about science. They tend to put a lot of effort, resources and money into things that really are of no benefit to us at the moment.

    It may have all changed now though, dark energy may be a real thing all of a sudden based on another theory with no physical evidence. Or it may have evidence now. I don't know.
     
  15. Irminsul

    Irminsul Valkyrie

    Messages:
    62
    Likes Received:
    104
    With all the talk about how our ancestors build what they did, the aliens always gets dismissed by science but wait for someone to come up with a theory about future humans travelling back in time with advanced technology and the scientists would probably be all over your nuts lol.
     
  16. -Yggdrasil-

    -Yggdrasil- Einherjar

    Messages:
    964
    Likes Received:
    101
    I think there was an episode on the universe where a dark skinned scientist is still upset about losing his father to cancer or something. Instead of putting more money forth into cancer research he was given a lot of money to research the invention of time travel. He wishes to travel back in time to find an alien race of people that could travel to earth and hope they'd have the technology to beat the cancer in his father.
    How greedy is that?
     
  17. Okiefreak

    Okiefreak Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,079
    Likes Received:
    4,937
    What you say about science is complete nonsense. Science is simply a way of gaining knowledge by rigorously testing hypotheses. Ideally, it teaches us to keep our minds open to all possibilities, but to accept as confirmed those that can pass the test of empirical validation. It requires gobs of evidence, subjected to rigorous testing and extensive peer review before a scientific theory is considered proven, and even then the theory is subject to continuous re-examination on the basis of new evidence. All of the technology you use in your daily life, like typing dippy messages and sharing your ignorance with the world via Hip Forums, is a product of science. Some religions (maybe yours) teach the individual to close their minds to science. And science has no room for blind faith. Recently some areas of mathematical physics, like M-theory and other theories of cosmology, posit things like multiple universes with no real evidence. Until they can come up with the evidence, we can take these theories with a grain of salt. If they're not empirically refutable, they're not science. Dark energy and dark energy are reasonable inferences from the available data. No area of human knowledge is free from assumptions, but science tries to keep them to a minimum. Whatever limitations you perceive for science are much worse for alternative forms of inquiry. Sometimes scientists and their admirers make claims that go beyond their data. But this is a far cry from saying that's what science is all about. I'm curious. Where did you get such batty ideas?
     
    2 people like this.
  18. themnax

    themnax Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,694
    Likes Received:
    4,465
    what science really is, and what religion really is, yes, those can both be true. but what people ignorantly call either or both, to create this supposed conflict, well off course, neither of those things can be true at all.

    both can be corrupted by ego and greed, and plenty of examples can be found of this having been done for both. the reason they can both be true, is that they are really not talking about the same things at all.

    when people try to claim that they are, that's where all this idea that people claim there's a conflict comes from.

    now there are words in the books of several organized religions that can be read as contradicting what science can and does observe. but they were written to make a social, spiritual or moral point, not as a substitute for exploring physical realities.

    at any rate, it still, whatever people want to believe, it is still up to us to avoid causing harm, and we can't avoid causing harm by denying reason, and the whole reason for religions having been given to us, is to encourage that avoidance of causing harm.

    so when people use religions as an excuse for causing harm, they are really going against what religions are about, whatever reason they might think they have, for doing so.
     
  19. guerillabedlam

    guerillabedlam _|=|-|=|_

    Messages:
    29,419
    Likes Received:
    6,296
    Many modern religious people don't have unyielding faith in their religion necessarily. For instance, some see the bible as metaphor and a book to base their morality on.

    I saw a debate with Bill Nye vs. a young earth creationist and the fundies main claim was that some of the measuring instruments may not be precise to date sediment in the Earth or something. I suspect a fundie would use a similar type of reasoning in regards to like red shifting and background microwave radiation and what not to disprove some aspects of physics/cosmology age estimations of the universe, I believe physics itself has disputed stuff like the age of the universe within It's own paradigm in the 20th century. Any kind of ambiguity in the data is what one with a different framework of the cosmos would likely point to.
     
  20. Okiefreak

    Okiefreak Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,079
    Likes Received:
    4,937
    Of course you can't, although some people give it a try. To start, you'd have to believe that religion is the revealed word of God, and that anything to the contrary is erroneous. That premise must be accepted uncritically on the basis of blind faith. If it is true, then any conflicting information from physics or any other science is simply dismissed as wrong. I once had a go-around with a fundamentalist in the Christian Sanctuary concerning the age of the earth. He was arguing that the Earth is 6,000 years old. He based this on biblical geneology. When I pointed out that scientists from a wide variety of academic disciplines had confirmed, after painstaking work, the reality of Paleolithic and Neolithic human life thousands of years earlier, he said they were wrong and even were conspiring to trick us. If you take that attitude, you can "disprove" anything, including physics.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice