tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805190.post1511725332768480058..comments2024-03-01T07:35:49.740-08:00Comments on Come Reason's Apologetics Notes: Quantum Fluctuations as Atheists’ Pixie DustLenny Espositohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04064209669748618955noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805190.post-8475470171474980802018-06-15T14:26:59.386-07:002018-06-15T14:26:59.386-07:00This is very smart, puting together agnostic and &...This is very smart, puting together agnostic and "he didn't belive in a personal god". Next we will have a triangle with four sides.<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09733762286306424243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805190.post-73118556796886357072015-08-24T05:52:48.650-07:002015-08-24T05:52:48.650-07:00Even if we accept that the universe has actually o...Even if we accept that the universe has actually originated from nothing, still it can be shown that there is a fundamental flaw in this theory. Universe means space, time, matter and energy; so as per the scientists not only matter and energy, but space-time as well, have originated from nothing. Scientists have successfully shown how the total matter-energy content of the present universe has always remained zero, but they have forgotten to show how its total space-time content has also remained zero. And it has to remain zero, because it has also originated from nothing. Again they say that the universe is expanding at an accelerated rate. So our question will be: How does the total space-time of an ever-expanding universe always remain zero?<br />If science fails to provide a suitable answer to this question, then the atheistic, non-religious world-view of modern science will prove to be inadequate to explaining the real world. uchitrakarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09317803821391979129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805190.post-22697311682045954702015-02-27T13:34:22.290-08:002015-02-27T13:34:22.290-08:00Einstein was an agnostic. He didn't believe in...Einstein was an agnostic. He didn't believe in a personal god. His god was Spinoza's. Religious people should stop trying to justify their faith in magic with Science.Benny Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12864075272675482502noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805190.post-29932804535422999522013-09-01T22:13:00.394-07:002013-09-01T22:13:00.394-07:00Uh, Who created the prexisting Quantum physics law...Uh, Who created the prexisting Quantum physics laws so that the heisenberg uncertainty principle and a quantum fluctuation could occur, to create the universe?<br /> Think, Steven Hawking, and stop trying to please the atheiststic British government that approves your Grant money. They wouldn't understand the definition of a scientific paradigm If it hit them in the head. But you do, so knock off the High priest and pope of physics act.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04104033184416324662noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805190.post-19871170169473713902012-04-28T14:38:25.083-07:002012-04-28T14:38:25.083-07:00Quantum physics of the gaps.Quantum physics of the gaps.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6805190.post-61118391185047961272010-10-21T12:41:32.602-07:002010-10-21T12:41:32.602-07:00In "The Grand Design" Stephen Hawking po...In "The Grand Design" Stephen Hawking postulates that the M-theory may be the Holy Grail of physics...the Grand Unified Theory which Einstein had tried to formulate but never completed. It expands on quantum mechanics and string theories.<br /><br />In my e-book on comparative mysticism is a quote by Albert Einstein: <i>“…most beautiful and profound emotion we can experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and most radiant beauty – which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their primitive form – this knowledge, this feeling, is at the center of all religion.”</i><br /><br />E=mc², Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, is probably the best known scientific equation. I revised it to help better understand the relationship between divine <b>E</b>ssence (Spirit), <b>m</b>atter (mass/energy: visible/dark) and <b>c</b>onsciousness (f(x) raised to its greatest power). Unlike the speed of light, which is a constant, there are no exact measurements for consciousness. In this hypothetical formula, basic consciousness may be of insects, to the second power of animals and to the third power the rational mind of humans. The fourth power is suprarational consciousness of mystics, when they intuit the divine essence in perceived matter. <i>This was a convenient analogy, but there cannot be a divine formula.</i>Ron Krumposhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05371279514024960026noreply@blogger.com