Questions from all atheists. Take time and then answer. Why human speak and posses WORDS. You know very well what is mean by WORDS and Languages. All lions makes same noise, all monkey makes same noise all dolphins make same noise and give same signals all around the world. But why we human speaks different WORDS and languages in different part of the world ? Why Chines and English Words are not same while Chines monkey and British monkey makes same sound ? Friend, Word matters. In the beginnin
@samaroo96 Word matters. So does spelling and grammar and you fail at that! But seriously, language developed as a result of our lifestyle. When humans were hunting and gathering, we had no written language.
@samaroo96 When we began agriculture, some people no longer had to work for food (surpluses). These people could take the time to analyze speech and invent the best symbols. It's all a matter of history/ geography.
Quantum physics, Science, biology, evolution, human mind can proof or can give evidence to Physical things which can be experience by physical senses, test, touch, hear, seeing and smell. But can not proof dream, words, languages, knowledge, imaginations, love, hate, jealousy, anger, lust etc. Because these thing have no cells, no molecules, no atoms, no positive or negative charges. But they exists and can build or destroy your life. Can you deny this fact. Bible deals these matters.
@realtyofislam ok, so lets be honest and say it like it is: "Bible treats stuff in the mind of men, a state of convince towards a concept, which then men regulate their behavior etc.(placebo, mind techniques etc.)" which of course doesn't proof the actual existence of the concept outside our mind interacting with the physical world.
This guys a moron! He's the using the laws of Physics to define the creation of the univierse, which is a moot point. The laws of Physics were created with matter and energy after the Big Bang. The singularity that generated the Big Bang may or may not follow these laws since such laws as we know it was not created yet.
The caller is wrong, by the way. The whole point about time dilation is that the speed of light remains unchanged for all observers, irrespective of their speed, direction, or frame of reference. It won't get stretched out into a "ray" -- if you're traveling toward a light source of away from it, it will change color due to Doppler shifting, but all its other characteristics will remain the same.
Matt's hilarious with the dancing in the beginning, and let's not forget Matt in drag! -He would be a funny dude to hang out with and someday I've got to meet him.
Actually, Stephen Hawking has a documentary explaining how we can explain the very "start" of the big bang with the laws of quantum mechanics. It's not relativistic, which are the laws that break down as things become smaller than the quantum level. At this scale, things pop in and out of existence all the time, and no, it doesn't break the law of conservation of energy. He explains that there was no need for a cause. It's called "Curiosity with Stephen Hawking, Did God Create the Universe?"
@vaguevocalist17 I remember when that first came on TV. It was epic.
What ever happened to that show? I watch the Science Channel all the time but I haven't seen it lately. The last episode I saw was with Eli Roth talking about Psychopathy.
@SeedsOfHatred The whole thing is on youtube. If anyone hasn't seen it, you should. It's explained beautifully by one of the smarter men who has ever lived. If there is anyone who can understand the vast array of complexities that it would take to create a universe, it's him.
while there are obvious logical holes in the argument...like any argument about the origin of the universe...this caller is definitely made the most sense compared to the usual arguments
@KingdomSeeker2012 God "supposedly" created two individuals who had no knowledge of right and wrong...If you have no knowledge of right and wrong how can you possibly understand the consequences of eating the fruit until after you're given that knowledge of right and wrong?
Original sin happened because Adam and Eve disobeyed God. They were given free will by God, otherwise they would have been robots. They chose to disobey God and there were consequences. God informed them of the consequences and they still chose to disobey Him. God gave them a warning. God is holy and His creation also have to be holy in order to be near Him, holiness comes from keeping away from sin. Disobedience is sin.
Seems to me that nobody considers the fact that there has never been found such a state of there being "nothing". Therefore wouldn't it make more sense to presume that whatever exists in the grand picture, is most likely a perpetual motion machine since energy can neither be created nor destroyed? See quantum physics for more details that relate to this idea.
@LegionIscariot Ever heard of the big bang? That's when space-time came into existence. So either the universe sprang into existence from nothing or something created the universe. I believe something beyond our senses exists. And I believe it's god. If you atheists want to be stubborn about this topic fine, continue worshiping yourself.
Worship ourselves? Men created God, so the Men who worship Gods are the ones worshiping themselves.
We're not sure how everything began, i'm not ashamed to say i don't know.
"If we can't scientifically explain (yet) then it must be the result of magic" is how primitive people think. Many gods have been killed by science. Some gods, yours for example, have retreated to outside space and time.
@arbkhan Ok so you asked me about the force that made the law. So what about the force that made that force? and the force that made that force? and the force that made that?...we're not going anywhere with this.
@pugolka that's the case with God. We couldn't see beyond the horizon-the world is flat
We couldn't explain lightning 1K years ago-God aka a being that doesn't take any sort of physical space, is all powerful and stuff exists so we can explain s**t.
@pugolka I'm not sure if you're joking, or for real. I'll refute what you say either way. You were right, we could not see beyond the horizon, so we assumed the world was flat. Science came in a stamped that assumption into the ground. Now everyone knows it's not flat. Science has done the same thing to the majority of Biblical claims. You say we can't understand God, then how can you assert he exists? If we can't understand him, we can't know him, so there is no proof he exists.
only human beings like all of us can be so egotistical to assume that there is no god...simply because we do not understand what he is. we could not see beyond the horizon therefore the world is flat! duh!
I love Atheist Experience bc they challenge people to think. And they give me a forum to inject light into their dark thinking, IOW refute their lies.
BUT they have blocked my from commenting on their tubes as have other atheists. But this is par for the course, bc atheists can only startle and deceive the unlearned. One that sees thru their lies is a threat to them and hence they ban me.
I like when ordinary people try to sound smart and bring up physics when all they know about it is what they saw on a discovery channel show. Then the first thing they always bring up to sound like they know what their talking about is time slowing down as you get closer to the speed of light.
@SANHEDRIN666 People tend to look for evidence that supports their own ideas, hence most atheist vids are full of atheist viewers and visa versa. Therefore titling the vids as though they're supporting the theist view might draw in the people who need to see it rather than it just being a case of preaching to the converted.
@SANHEDRIN666 :) Thank you. P.S. On a completely tangential note: IBM Model M keyboards are great! I just got one, which looks as though it's new, can't see any wear on it at all! Only cost me £14 ($22) too :o (Ones that were never unboxed from the early 1980s are going at an average of £80 or $120ish)... I want the M13 black trackpoint one, very rare but they look awesome!
@SANHEDRIN666 Because that's the subject that the caller is either bring into question, or what the caller is making his/her assertion. He's simply using the caller's perspective instead of his.
@SANHEDRIN666 It's the argument that the callers provide. For instance, I call in and say I have evidence god exists, that's what they would title the segment.
Here's an example of a Creator existing outside the rules of the Universe. It's as plausible an explanation as any for our place in the Universe, and the meaning of our lives.
Would you want to worship this Creator?
Take a look at the YouTube video ' God says sorry. '
@lacontrabasse Why would anybody want to worship some invisible dude in the sky and further why would this dude even need worship?? Isn't he supposed to be perfect?
Mankind is due for moving to a higher consciousness plane. The same way the suffering of gazelles killed by lions make the species stronger, the suffering of mankind will help us move to the next consciousness level. A greater good comes for the species. The next level is the rejection of greed, materialism and selfishness. Our current capitalist system need to collapse in order to achieve this. If you're not ready spiritually, and doesn't move up, you'll suffer. This is happening now, seek God.
God exists, God does not exist, God both exists and not exists.
Matt's totally unbiased analysis of this statement comes down to: "In two out of three of those situations God does not exist. Mull that around for a while".
Well Matt: In two out of three of those situations, duh, God does exist.
Consider the lack of knowledge we would have if we only relied on are sensual perception. And then look at the tools we create to extend our understanding past our sensual perception. This is the reason that we know for a fact that our concept of reality is subjective and does not accurately represent the reality that is abundantly evident all around us. The illusion is our perception of reality and not reality itself. Reality itself is just energy fields
Wanna talk multi dimensions or universe's, dark energy and matter? String and M theory? While we are at it we can touch on the problems with gravity theory and relativity. But lets not mention the alterations that science has been making since its inception. Because we all know what they say is fact will never be challenged as wrong. Anyone who says they understand quantum mechanics is lying, it is not a clear cut as you like to think.
@BankHeistVideos Actually very little is known when it comes to proclaiming facts. Most of what we proclaim is nothing more than an agreement based on people agreeing with the theory rather than proving it as a fact. You should read up about Craig Hogan and GEO600 project. And I typed it because that is the current agreed consensus on the evidence we have. Holographic noise theory is where we currently are at.
The guys didn't quite get special relativity right--observers from the outside would see the clock in the spacecraft move more slowly than their own clocks. Observers inside the spacecraft would likewise see clocks outside the spacecraft moving more slowly than their own clocks.
For every reaction there has to be an action. So, even when you allways go further back in time, at some point you have to encounter something, that doesn't have to apply for the Action/reaction-rule...
The best way of defining this immaterial being is to use the most obvious example of something.That is our CONSCIOUSNESS it is immaterial our thoughts have no physical nature despite our consciousness existing within a physical structure called the brain.So this being is best defined as pure consciousness at the beginning of creation was consciousness.
where did god come from? uncritical question.God is the reason for his own existence as God is first cause he is the reason for the material world being in existence.Why does the material world need an explanation well because it began to exist.Whatever begins to exist has a cause which is itself must be different than the thing it explains so the explanation of the natural world must be a being, however you define that being,that is immaterial in nature
There are multiple infinities. Each process that can always create a new type of object generates an object at infinity. Some processes stop creating distinct objects after infinity (more than infinity), but some go on (next after the infinitieth). Because the process is part of the object's behavior, the objects are distinct. Transfinite objects can be created when the process can't be continued, because other processes that were equivalent below infinity create yet another object.
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS FOR CREATIONISM-EVOLUTIONISM DEBATE (See Subchapter 10.2.2, Chapter 10, of Part Two.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
balancedway1.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
@dex1391 lol Have you looked in the mirror because seems like your face has no logic....no but seriously if god existed would he make you so fucking ugly.
@dex1391 no, no one would take anyones side just for saying something (how ever many children take the side of their parents, but thats different because children are at the learning stage). I just want you to research more into what you believe.
love the atheists like these two, they are so articulate, intelligent and yet quick to say they dont understand things beyond the bounds of reason and logic..how sad these religious people insist theres god but had hard time as always reasoning to its existence..
I think therefore I am, If I stop thinking I would be labelled dead. When I die, I in the materilistic sense have not altered, however something is now missing from this body, and it is most likely the electrical singnals. These signals are energy and thermodynamics dicates that it can not be destroyed or created, so where then does this energy go, or transform into when It leaves my material body and makes me clinically dead?
Current science allows room for God, but it is not proof
@TCupUK The energy in your body is released by chemical reactions in your body. If there are no such reactions then there is no energy and you are DEAD. Current science doesn't allow for any gods. This is madness. You have no understanding of what you are talking about.
@adam3251 I think it is you who has no understanding of what I said, maybe that is because you have closed your mind in a illusionary belith that you some how know everything?
Given mankinds current understanding I fail to see how it can be confirmed either way, however just because one wants it to be true and another wants it to be false, it is not a reason for me to dismiss it in such a way as to proclaim that I know.
The concepts I mentioned are not dismissed by those who study such things
To prove God we would first need to define what God is. That in itself is an argument that can not be won either way.
Quantum mechanics allows room for God, however it is not the Christain ideology of God. Existance as we percive it is now known to be an illusion, and this solidity that we base are concept of reality on is actually fluid.
Energy is the fundemental of everything, and energy can exist without matter. This allows consiouness to exist prior to matter, and thought is the key.
@TCupUK Actually, consciousness (you spelled it wrong by the way) is the sum or or arrival of the millions of neurons, synapses and electrical impulses in a highly evolved brain, it cannot exist without matter. If you can demonstrate that a mind, consciousness or feelings can exist without matter, please do so or shut the fuck up.
@jlmdfnbo I can see your intellect shining through, you amaze me with your sublime use of the English language.
Clearly there will be no use trying to explain things on a quantum level. Maybe it is because you are just to ignorant to see, or more probably it is your ape like mentality. If you are interested, you may gain something from looking in to the quantum sciences, however I doubt you will because it suggest different to your preconception of existence and consciousness.
@TCupUK I know that much about quantum sciences that I can say nothing in there offers no proof for -> A deity is a recognized preternatural or supernatural immortal being, who may be thought of as holy, divine, or sacred, held in high regard, and respected by believers, often religiously referred to as a god. Supernatural by definition is something that is outside, above or beyond the natural law and the observable universe. Quantum physics opens no doors to outside the universe (all that is).
@jlmdfnbo You show your clear lack of understanding regarding the science. Holographic theory suggests that all this matter is nothing more than an illusion. Entanglement theory shows how to particles can interact with each other regardless of distance or obstacles in-between,. One dies, it kills the other. Even if they are on opposite sides of the universe. You do sound like you enjoy a bible bashing and any opportunity to assert your Belief above others. I personally prefer provable facts.
@TCupUK You didn't read what I said at all, did you? All that shit you just described may happen (too early to tell really, quantum science being a new thing and all) would happen in the natural world, and be perfectly reasonable and explainable. Anything supernatural is not. If God were some alien lifeform formed on a galaxy, far away and takes interest in the actions of talking primates, he's not God at all. He would be a fucking weirdo with no life of his own.
@jlmdfnbo You are stupid, those things I have described are proven as fact and have been for a very long time. They are not just Theory as we have observable tests to prove them as fact. Supernatural in the scientific sense occurs and remains super natural even though we can explain it fully. Look into super conductors and fluids. They do things that defy the laws of classical physics. Maybe you think you are conversing with a Christian? And this is why you choose to be ignorant of the science.
@jlmdfnbo It is actually you who has closed your mind to science. Care to explain dark matter and dark energy to the rest of us, as you seem to have the answers that science is looking for!
I am only pulling your leg, mainly because I was hoping you stimulation of discussion would bring up some things of interest. Unfortunately you seem to be locked in to left brain thinking and I suppose you can not be held responsible for this. Would it help if I made some grammatical errors?
@TCupUK How is our existence an illusion? Also, energy cannot create consciousness, as far as we know, consciousness exists when matter combines with other elements in a very precise pattern. Without stars producing like 80% of the periodic table elements, there is only matter, antimatter, and hydrogen ( I think ) from what we know, you cannot have consciousness with just those elements. I'll admit I don't really know much about quantum mechanics, so I could be completely wrong.
@Halflifefan54 I will struggle to explain it with you-tube's 150 word limitations. I will send you a brief explanation in a pm as I believe it has no word limitation. For others I will mention some things they may want to research if they have the same questions.
DR Quantum on you-tube will explain it all much better than I can.
Double slit experiment.
Holographic theory.
Entanglement theory.
Not all the sources of the information will be genuine and many try to twist what we know as fact.
@acr08807 Try not removing the words that give it context.
"Energy is the fundemental of everything, and energy can exist without matter. This allows consiouness to exist prior to matter, and thought is the key."
Try showing me something that exists that does not contain some form of energy?
@TCupUK We weren't discussing matter, we were discussing energy. I can show you time that does not contain energy, but I'd need matter (e.g., your eyes, a clock) to do it. I'm not sure whether you're getting your notion of energy from physical theory or from other source. If it's from physics, then in quantum mechanics, time and energy are orthogonal, so time can't contain energy. What is your definition of energy, and where does it come from?
of that energy into multiple forms, some containing matter and others not. All interacting and entangled regardless of space-time. You should revise your understanding of the standard model. I am heavily into QM and my definition of "energy" is the endless possibility for manifestation and transmutation.
Time can not be considered without energy in the equation as it is the observance of change that is time and not an actual clock. Before time which is 10-46 there was nothing, everything after this point contains energy. Matter can only be energy, but energy does not have to be matter. Transformation -
@TCupUK Time is one eigenvector of the quantum state of a system. Energy is another eigenvector. I can assure you, they are completely separate in quantum mechanics--one cannot contain the other. No doubt it takes energy to observe time, but that's not the same as saying that time is composed of energy. Anyway, most people don't understand what energy is in physics--it's not a substance, it's the quantity that must be conserved if the laws of physics don't change over time.
@acr08807 You are correct that both C and E can be used as an eigenvector to explain quanta's. However this fact does not prove that time can exist independently of energy. Which was the premiss of your argument. Hamiltonian methods are not being questioned. Your statement that time is independent of energy is. How do you reconcile the indeterministic nature of the wave-function collapse? Also as time is considered 4D how do you explain the lack of energy?
@TCupUK (1) All I'm claiming is that energy and time are equally fundamental in physical law, and that neither one forms any part of the other. (2) I don't claim that wavefunctions collapse, or that, if they do, the collapse is indeterministic. I think you're confusing WFC and decoherence. (3) In QM there is no energy component to time, for the same reason there is no grapefruit component. They are just different things. Heisenberg uncertainty simply does not work if time contains energy.
@TCupUK (1) All I'm claiming is that energy and time are equally fundamental in physical law, and that neither one forms any part of the other. (2) I don't claim that wavefunctions collapse, or that, if they do, the collapse is indeterministic. I think you're confusing WFC and decoherence. (3) In QM there is no energy component to time, for the same reason there is no grapefruit component. They are just different things. Heisenberg uncertainty simply does not work if time contains energy.
@TCupUK I'm a physicist. My field is topological quantum field theory. I know what QM is--it IS a theory, and there is also a field that studies it. My field as it happens. Nothing in QM requirers an observer. I understand why you're confused--QM isn't hard to understand, but it takes a mathematics background that few persons have, and I do love your curiosity about the subject.
@acr08807 Your field fascinates me. Would I be close if i said that you deal with the logical heirarchies and structures that QM predicts may have an influence on as yet unobserved phenomena? I can't remember, it's not Planks ZPE radiation thing, but it has to do with empty space at the quantum level in regards to dark energy. I had a question but have gone blank..will reply.
@acr08807 Care to share your name so I can read up on your work?
I am still struggling to understand your concept of time, do you know of any scholar articles that support your view point of time?
I will leave the observer point for now, mainly because of the ambiguity associated with the word. However we do know by provable tests that the act of observing effects the results, I am sure you are more than aware of the two slit experiment and its implications.
@TCupUK I do way too much trolling on youtube to tell anyone who I am. Anyway, my work is only intelligible to a small set of specialists. If you tell me what your background in math and physics are, I can point you to appropriate references. One thing to remember, though, is that QM is just a model. Whatever energy and time are (we physicists don't understand time any better than anyone else, and you wouldn't believe what our concept of energy is if I told you), they aren't math.
@acr08807 I have a BSc in computer science and consider myself to have a good mathematical understanding. I would be pursing my love of astro and particle physics if not for my illness. I consider myself kept up to date with current conceptions in this field. I also understand the lack of agreement in this field regarding many things that the lay man considers to be indisputable fact. Time itself is a funny thing because it seems all most impossible to conceive of it prior to the BB/Inflation.
@TCupUK Great, a science/math background makes it much easier. Conceptually, every physicist has trouble thinking about time at or before the Big Bang, because we don't have a quantum mechanical theory of gravity. To me, "lack of agreement" means "we don't know and have a bunch of untested hypotheses." Then again, I think "agreement" just means "we have a model that explains everything we've seen so far but we don't really know what's going on."
@TCupUK So, anyway, now you see my bias. If there are nine "interpretations" of quantum mechanics and they all make exactly the same predictions, I'm not spending time thinking about which one (if any) is "right." George Greenstein and Arthur Zajonc wrote a great book called The Quantum Challenge that approaches QM this way, but it assumes knowledge of QM at the level of an undergrad QM course. Let me think about how to get you there quickly.
@TCupUK That's exactly the critical relationship. The essential idea is that the uncertainty of the the rate of change of the energy of a process is proportional to the length of time it takes for that process to occur. If we know the time over which the process occurs precisely, we have the most uncertainty as to the change in the system's energy as it undergoes that process. However, if time is made from energy, then specifying the time over which the process occurs tells us
@TCupUK something about the change in energy because it tells us about the change in the energy component of the change in time. I realize that may sound like doubletalk, which is why I'm trying to find an economical way to make the math more precise to you. I need to think about that and report back. BTW, this leads to the best physics joke ever. Q: How is quantum mechanics like sex? A: When I've got the time, I don't have the energy.
"He's dancing like a fool." thinks the man with a cow on his shoulder. lol
cane63106 3 weeks ago
Questions from all atheists. Take time and then answer. Why human speak and posses WORDS. You know very well what is mean by WORDS and Languages. All lions makes same noise, all monkey makes same noise all dolphins make same noise and give same signals all around the world. But why we human speaks different WORDS and languages in different part of the world ? Why Chines and English Words are not same while Chines monkey and British monkey makes same sound ? Friend, Word matters. In the beginnin
samaroo96 3 weeks ago
@samaroo96 Word matters. So does spelling and grammar and you fail at that! But seriously, language developed as a result of our lifestyle. When humans were hunting and gathering, we had no written language.
MunkyDrag0n 1 week ago
@samaroo96 When we began agriculture, some people no longer had to work for food (surpluses). These people could take the time to analyze speech and invent the best symbols. It's all a matter of history/ geography.
MunkyDrag0n 1 week ago
Quantum physics, Science, biology, evolution, human mind can proof or can give evidence to Physical things which can be experience by physical senses, test, touch, hear, seeing and smell. But can not proof dream, words, languages, knowledge, imaginations, love, hate, jealousy, anger, lust etc. Because these thing have no cells, no molecules, no atoms, no positive or negative charges. But they exists and can build or destroy your life. Can you deny this fact. Bible deals these matters.
realtyofislam 1 month ago
@realtyofislam ok, so lets be honest and say it like it is: "Bible treats stuff in the mind of men, a state of convince towards a concept, which then men regulate their behavior etc.(placebo, mind techniques etc.)" which of course doesn't proof the actual existence of the concept outside our mind interacting with the physical world.
giorgiomx 3 weeks ago in playlist More videos from FFreeThinker
This guys a moron! He's the using the laws of Physics to define the creation of the univierse, which is a moot point. The laws of Physics were created with matter and energy after the Big Bang. The singularity that generated the Big Bang may or may not follow these laws since such laws as we know it was not created yet.
njintau 1 month ago
The caller is wrong, by the way. The whole point about time dilation is that the speed of light remains unchanged for all observers, irrespective of their speed, direction, or frame of reference. It won't get stretched out into a "ray" -- if you're traveling toward a light source of away from it, it will change color due to Doppler shifting, but all its other characteristics will remain the same.
prodprod 1 month ago
Matt's hilarious with the dancing in the beginning, and let's not forget Matt in drag! -He would be a funny dude to hang out with and someday I've got to meet him.
Lennon4ever1 1 month ago
God is real, the stuffed cow told me so!
bowser5295 1 month ago
Actually, Stephen Hawking has a documentary explaining how we can explain the very "start" of the big bang with the laws of quantum mechanics. It's not relativistic, which are the laws that break down as things become smaller than the quantum level. At this scale, things pop in and out of existence all the time, and no, it doesn't break the law of conservation of energy. He explains that there was no need for a cause. It's called "Curiosity with Stephen Hawking, Did God Create the Universe?"
vaguevocalist17 1 month ago
@vaguevocalist17 I remember when that first came on TV. It was epic.
What ever happened to that show? I watch the Science Channel all the time but I haven't seen it lately. The last episode I saw was with Eli Roth talking about Psychopathy.
SeedsOfHatred 1 month ago
@SeedsOfHatred The whole thing is on youtube. If anyone hasn't seen it, you should. It's explained beautifully by one of the smarter men who has ever lived. If there is anyone who can understand the vast array of complexities that it would take to create a universe, it's him.
vaguevocalist17 1 month ago
@vaguevocalist17 It is a great episode. But I mean the show in general; I haven't seen it on TV lately. No commercials or anything.
SeedsOfHatred 1 month ago
while there are obvious logical holes in the argument...like any argument about the origin of the universe...this caller is definitely made the most sense compared to the usual arguments
Metamorphosis33 1 month ago
Sagan gets you every time!
GenghisCohen1 1 month ago
@KingdomSeeker2012 God "supposedly" created two individuals who had no knowledge of right and wrong...If you have no knowledge of right and wrong how can you possibly understand the consequences of eating the fruit until after you're given that knowledge of right and wrong?
enyskept 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Original sin happened because Adam and Eve disobeyed God. They were given free will by God, otherwise they would have been robots. They chose to disobey God and there were consequences. God informed them of the consequences and they still chose to disobey Him. God gave them a warning. God is holy and His creation also have to be holy in order to be near Him, holiness comes from keeping away from sin. Disobedience is sin.
KingdomSeeker2012 1 month ago
@PERSONALCHRISTJESUS sure.. also the pointless point, the meaningless meaning, the purposeless purpose etc..
Hufflewaffle 1 month ago
if you look closely at this Matt's facial muscles n many many many like him you will know the truth!!! Love Love Love
misterdeeeep 1 month ago
Physics fail!
aqouby 2 months ago
can't prove anything out of space and time
broadcastmyass4u 2 months ago
@broadcastmyass4u
Yeah . Like the millions of U turns . Science is gonna take that one too .
arbkhan 2 months ago
Seems to me that nobody considers the fact that there has never been found such a state of there being "nothing". Therefore wouldn't it make more sense to presume that whatever exists in the grand picture, is most likely a perpetual motion machine since energy can neither be created nor destroyed? See quantum physics for more details that relate to this idea.
DrRegnig 2 months ago
They have a decent handle on logical fallacy's, but its very clear that no one in this video is a physicist.
elatus 2 months ago
big bang is not an example of something from nothing. will those who keep bringing this up pls do some reading.....
elgar104 2 months ago
@elgar104
Did laws of physics exist before big bang ?
arbkhan 2 months ago
@arbkhan They might have
wHisperis001 2 months ago
Don't even know if an "Outside Of Space And Time" even exists, how can they just claim that's where he resides?
LegionIscariot 2 months ago
@LegionIscariot Ever heard of the big bang? That's when space-time came into existence. So either the universe sprang into existence from nothing or something created the universe. I believe something beyond our senses exists. And I believe it's god. If you atheists want to be stubborn about this topic fine, continue worshiping yourself.
ajhrockerboy6 2 months ago
@ajhrockerboy6
Worship ourselves? Men created God, so the Men who worship Gods are the ones worshiping themselves.
We're not sure how everything began, i'm not ashamed to say i don't know.
"If we can't scientifically explain (yet) then it must be the result of magic" is how primitive people think. Many gods have been killed by science. Some gods, yours for example, have retreated to outside space and time.
LegionIscariot 2 months ago
@LegionIscariot
Greates scientific discovery E=mc^2 . Took So many years to discover it . What about the force that made the law ?
arbkhan 2 months ago
@arbkhan Ok, the force that made the law, what about it?
LegionIscariot 2 months ago
@LegionIscariot
Means that humans are not the most intelligent beings around here does it ?
arbkhan 2 months ago
@arbkhan Ok so you asked me about the force that made the law. So what about the force that made that force? and the force that made that force? and the force that made that?...we're not going anywhere with this.
LegionIscariot 2 months ago
"Outside" of space and time does not exist, ergo something can not "exist" in nothing.
Furthermore you can't place an object with dimensions in nothing, because there's no space to place it(Universe).
Omnipotence and any other omni's are self contradicting and logical fallacies, thus something can not be omnipotence.
baldurus1 2 months ago
@pugolka that's the case with God. We couldn't see beyond the horizon-the world is flat
We couldn't explain lightning 1K years ago-God aka a being that doesn't take any sort of physical space, is all powerful and stuff exists so we can explain s**t.
SOMERANDOMGUYDOZ 3 months ago
lmfao the intro is hilarious
trigg3r305 3 months ago
@pugolka I'm not sure if you're joking, or for real. I'll refute what you say either way. You were right, we could not see beyond the horizon, so we assumed the world was flat. Science came in a stamped that assumption into the ground. Now everyone knows it's not flat. Science has done the same thing to the majority of Biblical claims. You say we can't understand God, then how can you assert he exists? If we can't understand him, we can't know him, so there is no proof he exists.
RobWRobins 3 months ago
only human beings like all of us can be so egotistical to assume that there is no god...simply because we do not understand what he is. we could not see beyond the horizon therefore the world is flat! duh!
pugolka 3 months ago
double slit experiment... is proof of god.
pugolka 3 months ago
funniest beginning to an atheist experience clip i've ever seen! >.<
HuyerPercussive 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I love Atheist Experience bc they challenge people to think. And they give me a forum to inject light into their dark thinking, IOW refute their lies.
BUT they have blocked my from commenting on their tubes as have other atheists. But this is par for the course, bc atheists can only startle and deceive the unlearned. One that sees thru their lies is a threat to them and hence they ban me.
j919or 3 months ago
This guy should watch Lawrence Krauss', "A universe from nothing".
/watch?v=7ImvlS8PLIo
gpokriff2 3 months ago
You know why the screen tears like that at 9:02? Because of their BBUUURRNN.
Lars0n 4 months ago in playlist Atheist experience clips
these guys are idiots they argue for the sake of arguing...not understanding...definition of an idiot...
wordyeaux 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
666 have an awesome sense of humor.
stjamal11 4 months ago
I think he proved it
madjestic 4 months ago
I like when ordinary people try to sound smart and bring up physics when all they know about it is what they saw on a discovery channel show. Then the first thing they always bring up to sound like they know what their talking about is time slowing down as you get closer to the speed of light.
flatpat 4 months ago
Why are these videos called "distinctive evidence of God"...."Proof of God"...."Atheists are wrong" etc
When its matt ripping them a new asshole. lol
SANHEDRIN666 4 months ago 41
@SANHEDRIN666 why don't you guys talk about new age and debunk that for once really... sigh...
TheLovesoul1 3 months ago
@TheLovesoul1 You can rip the leaves of a weed but it will still come back.... you must attack it from the roots.
SANHEDRIN666 3 months ago
@SANHEDRIN666 i agree brother. peace
TheLovesoul1 3 months ago
@SANHEDRIN666 i guess that is to get religion people to watch it
Draehorx 3 months ago
@SANHEDRIN666
Because we have watched enough to know that Matt rips them a new asshole every time.
NBM397 2 months ago
@SANHEDRIN666 People tend to look for evidence that supports their own ideas, hence most atheist vids are full of atheist viewers and visa versa. Therefore titling the vids as though they're supporting the theist view might draw in the people who need to see it rather than it just being a case of preaching to the converted.
DrRegnig 2 months ago
@DrRegnig agreed.. good answer
SANHEDRIN666 2 months ago
@SANHEDRIN666 :) Thank you. P.S. On a completely tangential note: IBM Model M keyboards are great! I just got one, which looks as though it's new, can't see any wear on it at all! Only cost me £14 ($22) too :o (Ones that were never unboxed from the early 1980s are going at an average of £80 or $120ish)... I want the M13 black trackpoint one, very rare but they look awesome!
DrRegnig 2 months ago
@SANHEDRIN666 Because that's the subject that the caller is either bring into question, or what the caller is making his/her assertion. He's simply using the caller's perspective instead of his.
dailoh90 2 months ago
@SANHEDRIN666
Because it's the subject...
KrugmanTheKing 2 months ago
@SANHEDRIN666 Because it's summarizing people's ridiculous ideas.
Nebuli2 1 month ago
@SANHEDRIN666 It's called satire, my friend :)
lmaso99xx 1 month ago
@SANHEDRIN666 my best guess would be the title is done INTENTIONALLY to try and get theists to actually watch the video...pretty clever huh
Metamorphosis33 1 month ago
@SANHEDRIN666 LOL
xBlackEditionx 1 month ago
@SANHEDRIN666 Because if it's just "Creationist gets wrecked", then the Christians don't watch, and the atheist just lol.
Sean1Sullivan 3 weeks ago 3
@SANHEDRIN666 This video is uploaded by an atheist.
offwithurhead 3 weeks ago
@SANHEDRIN666 It's the argument that the callers provide. For instance, I call in and say I have evidence god exists, that's what they would title the segment.
HxCDeathMetalHead 1 week ago
God must have punished this guy by making him bald as a baby's ass.
oldlite 4 months ago
@ShockWave270 What's wrong with masturbation ?
ForYeensSake 4 months ago
@ForYeensSake Ya could ware it out or rub it raw.But, for me, sex is like food. As long as you get enough to eat, you're never hungry
TheDano1947 4 months ago 9
@TheDano1947 Amen.
ForYeensSake 4 months ago
@ForYeensSake " Amen" Nah A Women.!!
TheDano1947 4 months ago
Is that christian guy caller saying he has proof that he is pregnant???
WolfySnackrib666 5 months ago
Hah, loved the intro
imralav 5 months ago
Why can't we all just get along :(
senorcoonster 5 months ago
Here's an example of a Creator existing outside the rules of the Universe. It's as plausible an explanation as any for our place in the Universe, and the meaning of our lives.
Would you want to worship this Creator?
Take a look at the YouTube video ' God says sorry. '
lacontrabasse 5 months ago
@lacontrabasse Why would anybody want to worship some invisible dude in the sky and further why would this dude even need worship?? Isn't he supposed to be perfect?
TheDano1947 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Mankind is due for moving to a higher consciousness plane. The same way the suffering of gazelles killed by lions make the species stronger, the suffering of mankind will help us move to the next consciousness level. A greater good comes for the species. The next level is the rejection of greed, materialism and selfishness. Our current capitalist system need to collapse in order to achieve this. If you're not ready spiritually, and doesn't move up, you'll suffer. This is happening now, seek God.
dejesusluisx 5 months ago
7:50 -8;15 Three possibilities.
God exists, God does not exist, God both exists and not exists.
Matt's totally unbiased analysis of this statement comes down to: "In two out of three of those situations God does not exist. Mull that around for a while".
Well Matt: In two out of three of those situations, duh, God does exist.
Mull that around for a while you smug clown.
pompousprick 5 months ago
@pompousprick That comes out to a total of 4 out of 3 possibilities.
The logic is stunningly logical.
TheIncognitusMe 5 months ago
Comment removed
Anzacpaul 4 months ago
Lol somebody failed to see the point. Mull it over a bit longer.
Anzacpaul 4 months ago
@Anzacpaul Typical idiot comment from a TAE fan. Bah, bah.....
pompousprick 4 months ago
@Anzacpaul Yeah, he did, the caller really should watch this video to try & understand what Matt & Martin are telling him
Tarynus 4 months ago
@BankHeistVideos You do make me smile.
Consider the lack of knowledge we would have if we only relied on are sensual perception. And then look at the tools we create to extend our understanding past our sensual perception. This is the reason that we know for a fact that our concept of reality is subjective and does not accurately represent the reality that is abundantly evident all around us. The illusion is our perception of reality and not reality itself. Reality itself is just energy fields
TCupUK 5 months ago
Ya think!
flatop59 5 months ago
@BankHeistVideos Is that so?
Wanna talk multi dimensions or universe's, dark energy and matter? String and M theory? While we are at it we can touch on the problems with gravity theory and relativity. But lets not mention the alterations that science has been making since its inception. Because we all know what they say is fact will never be challenged as wrong. Anyone who says they understand quantum mechanics is lying, it is not a clear cut as you like to think.
TCupUK 5 months ago
@BankHeistVideos Actually very little is known when it comes to proclaiming facts. Most of what we proclaim is nothing more than an agreement based on people agreeing with the theory rather than proving it as a fact. You should read up about Craig Hogan and GEO600 project. And I typed it because that is the current agreed consensus on the evidence we have. Holographic noise theory is where we currently are at.
TCupUK 5 months ago
If theres no God,wheres my hope in a lost world,,, atheism,,,no thx!~
flatop59 5 months ago
@flatop59 Wow. Man up.
LondonIrishRover 5 months ago
The guys didn't quite get special relativity right--observers from the outside would see the clock in the spacecraft move more slowly than their own clocks. Observers inside the spacecraft would likewise see clocks outside the spacecraft moving more slowly than their own clocks.
acr08807 6 months ago
Won't sience get into the same problem...?
For every reaction there has to be an action. So, even when you allways go further back in time, at some point you have to encounter something, that doesn't have to apply for the Action/reaction-rule...
TheTruggsess 6 months ago
even experiments need a scientist behind a experience
legalis1 6 months ago
The best way of defining this immaterial being is to use the most obvious example of something.That is our CONSCIOUSNESS it is immaterial our thoughts have no physical nature despite our consciousness existing within a physical structure called the brain.So this being is best defined as pure consciousness at the beginning of creation was consciousness.
TheTruthgeneral 6 months ago
where did god come from? uncritical question.God is the reason for his own existence as God is first cause he is the reason for the material world being in existence.Why does the material world need an explanation well because it began to exist.Whatever begins to exist has a cause which is itself must be different than the thing it explains so the explanation of the natural world must be a being, however you define that being,that is immaterial in nature
TheTruthgeneral 6 months ago
@TheTruthgeneral How do you know the material world began to exist?
acr08807 6 months ago
There are multiple infinities. Each process that can always create a new type of object generates an object at infinity. Some processes stop creating distinct objects after infinity (more than infinity), but some go on (next after the infinitieth). Because the process is part of the object's behavior, the objects are distinct. Transfinite objects can be created when the process can't be continued, because other processes that were equivalent below infinity create yet another object.
LokiClock 6 months ago
>Austin
vanilkachill 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Matt is just lost from the get go on this one. Hang up quick Matt!
pompousprick 6 months ago
Comment removed
pompousprick 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ShockWave270 10 out of 10 dude.
alianchild 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK (Donated) For Debates And Governance
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS FOR CREATIONISM-EVOLUTIONISM DEBATE (See Subchapter 10.2.2, Chapter 10, of Part Two.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
balancedway1.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
TheServiceWeb 6 months ago
@ShockWave270 just want to say, you're 100% right
Vahkahron 6 months ago
Of there's no God then why you people always talking about God just leave it alone and go fuck your self
THEMAKDON 6 months ago
Doesn't Schrodinger's Cat and quantum physics kind of throw the "A or not A" thing out of the window?
ytmndman 6 months ago
LMAO... listening to these two is like listening to 4 year olds discussing calculus. facepalm. they have no clue...
dex1391 6 months ago
@dex1391 lol Have you looked in the mirror because seems like your face has no logic....no but seriously if god existed would he make you so fucking ugly.
greekpanther1 6 months ago
@greekpanther1
LOL facepalm... I love it
dex1391 6 months ago
@dex1391 good
greekpanther1 6 months ago
@greekpanther1
Is it just Christians that you hate or is it all non-atheists...?
dex1391 6 months ago
@dex1391 i dont hate them...its just i hate the fact that they believe in childish things.
greekpanther1 6 months ago
@greekpanther1
Ah yes... everyone that refutes atheism is childish...
Get bent....
dex1391 6 months ago
@dex1391 ok ill get bent, but ur still wrong :)
greekpanther1 6 months ago
@greekpanther1
cool... I'll believe you the moment you provide proof.
dex1391 6 months ago
@dex1391 proof? haha your not even worth the effort... bye.
greekpanther1 6 months ago
@greekpanther1
Yes proof. You really think I'm just going to take your word for it?
Idiot...
dex1391 6 months ago
@dex1391 sorry if you havent noticed; your the one claiming something not me.
greekpanther1 6 months ago
@greekpanther1
I see.... so that means I should just take your side ... simply because you said so right?
idiot...
dex1391 6 months ago
@dex1391 no, no one would take anyones side just for saying something (how ever many children take the side of their parents, but thats different because children are at the learning stage). I just want you to research more into what you believe.
greekpanther1 6 months ago
@greekpanther1
I have... you should as well.
Like I said... show me proof and I'll believe you.
Until then... I'm not going to just believe you...
dex1391 6 months ago
@dex1391 so you believe in father christmas?
greekpanther1 6 months ago
@greekpanther1
Do you believe that the moon landing was faked?
dex1391 6 months ago
@dex1391 no..
greekpanther1 6 months ago
what the hell is this guy talking about???
83redrose83 7 months ago
Not following this guys train? Good, because it derailed a few miles back...
Hornadayfan 7 months ago
love the atheists like these two, they are so articulate, intelligent and yet quick to say they dont understand things beyond the bounds of reason and logic..how sad these religious people insist theres god but had hard time as always reasoning to its existence..
robertreyes062067 7 months ago
Contiued..
I think therefore I am, If I stop thinking I would be labelled dead. When I die, I in the materilistic sense have not altered, however something is now missing from this body, and it is most likely the electrical singnals. These signals are energy and thermodynamics dicates that it can not be destroyed or created, so where then does this energy go, or transform into when It leaves my material body and makes me clinically dead?
Current science allows room for God, but it is not proof
TCupUK 7 months ago
@TCupUK The energy in your body is released by chemical reactions in your body. If there are no such reactions then there is no energy and you are DEAD. Current science doesn't allow for any gods. This is madness. You have no understanding of what you are talking about.
adam3251 6 months ago
@adam3251"this is madness" no, THIS... IS... SPARTA!
JuanchoMan 6 months ago
@adam3251 I think it is you who has no understanding of what I said, maybe that is because you have closed your mind in a illusionary belith that you some how know everything?
Given mankinds current understanding I fail to see how it can be confirmed either way, however just because one wants it to be true and another wants it to be false, it is not a reason for me to dismiss it in such a way as to proclaim that I know.
The concepts I mentioned are not dismissed by those who study such things
TCupUK 6 months ago
To prove God we would first need to define what God is. That in itself is an argument that can not be won either way.
Quantum mechanics allows room for God, however it is not the Christain ideology of God. Existance as we percive it is now known to be an illusion, and this solidity that we base are concept of reality on is actually fluid.
Energy is the fundemental of everything, and energy can exist without matter. This allows consiouness to exist prior to matter, and thought is the key.
TCupUK 7 months ago 16
@TCupUK Actually, consciousness (you spelled it wrong by the way) is the sum or or arrival of the millions of neurons, synapses and electrical impulses in a highly evolved brain, it cannot exist without matter. If you can demonstrate that a mind, consciousness or feelings can exist without matter, please do so or shut the fuck up.
jlmdfnbo 6 months ago
@jlmdfnbo I can see your intellect shining through, you amaze me with your sublime use of the English language.
Clearly there will be no use trying to explain things on a quantum level. Maybe it is because you are just to ignorant to see, or more probably it is your ape like mentality. If you are interested, you may gain something from looking in to the quantum sciences, however I doubt you will because it suggest different to your preconception of existence and consciousness.
TCupUK 6 months ago
@TCupUK I know that much about quantum sciences that I can say nothing in there offers no proof for -> A deity is a recognized preternatural or supernatural immortal being, who may be thought of as holy, divine, or sacred, held in high regard, and respected by believers, often religiously referred to as a god. Supernatural by definition is something that is outside, above or beyond the natural law and the observable universe. Quantum physics opens no doors to outside the universe (all that is).
jlmdfnbo 6 months ago
@jlmdfnbo You show your clear lack of understanding regarding the science. Holographic theory suggests that all this matter is nothing more than an illusion. Entanglement theory shows how to particles can interact with each other regardless of distance or obstacles in-between,. One dies, it kills the other. Even if they are on opposite sides of the universe. You do sound like you enjoy a bible bashing and any opportunity to assert your Belief above others. I personally prefer provable facts.
TCupUK 6 months ago
@TCupUK You didn't read what I said at all, did you? All that shit you just described may happen (too early to tell really, quantum science being a new thing and all) would happen in the natural world, and be perfectly reasonable and explainable. Anything supernatural is not. If God were some alien lifeform formed on a galaxy, far away and takes interest in the actions of talking primates, he's not God at all. He would be a fucking weirdo with no life of his own.
jlmdfnbo 6 months ago
@jlmdfnbo You are stupid, those things I have described are proven as fact and have been for a very long time. They are not just Theory as we have observable tests to prove them as fact. Supernatural in the scientific sense occurs and remains super natural even though we can explain it fully. Look into super conductors and fluids. They do things that defy the laws of classical physics. Maybe you think you are conversing with a Christian? And this is why you choose to be ignorant of the science.
TCupUK 6 months ago
@TCupUK There's just no talking sense to you. I'm done. Have a good life.
jlmdfnbo 6 months ago
@jlmdfnbo It is actually you who has closed your mind to science. Care to explain dark matter and dark energy to the rest of us, as you seem to have the answers that science is looking for!
I am only pulling your leg, mainly because I was hoping you stimulation of discussion would bring up some things of interest. Unfortunately you seem to be locked in to left brain thinking and I suppose you can not be held responsible for this. Would it help if I made some grammatical errors?
TCupUK 6 months ago
@TCupUK How is our existence an illusion? Also, energy cannot create consciousness, as far as we know, consciousness exists when matter combines with other elements in a very precise pattern. Without stars producing like 80% of the periodic table elements, there is only matter, antimatter, and hydrogen ( I think ) from what we know, you cannot have consciousness with just those elements. I'll admit I don't really know much about quantum mechanics, so I could be completely wrong.
Halflifefan54 6 months ago
@Halflifefan54 I will struggle to explain it with you-tube's 150 word limitations. I will send you a brief explanation in a pm as I believe it has no word limitation. For others I will mention some things they may want to research if they have the same questions.
DR Quantum on you-tube will explain it all much better than I can.
Double slit experiment.
Holographic theory.
Entanglement theory.
Not all the sources of the information will be genuine and many try to twist what we know as fact.
TCupUK 6 months ago
Matter =5% Dark matter =20% and the other 75% is considered to be dark energy.
Matter is not all there is, and in actual fact it is minor in comparison to the missing 95% that appear to be nothing.
TCupUK 6 months ago
@TCupUK "Energy is the fundamental of everything" is a meaningless phrase. You can't draw any conclusions from it.
acr08807 6 months ago
@acr08807 Try not removing the words that give it context.
"Energy is the fundemental of everything, and energy can exist without matter. This allows consiouness to exist prior to matter, and thought is the key."
Try showing me something that exists that does not contain some form of energy?
TCupUK 6 months ago
@TCupUK Time.
acr08807 6 months ago
@acr08807 Can you show me an instance of time that does not involve matter?
TCupUK 6 months ago
@TCupUK We weren't discussing matter, we were discussing energy. I can show you time that does not contain energy, but I'd need matter (e.g., your eyes, a clock) to do it. I'm not sure whether you're getting your notion of energy from physical theory or from other source. If it's from physics, then in quantum mechanics, time and energy are orthogonal, so time can't contain energy. What is your definition of energy, and where does it come from?
acr08807 6 months ago
of that energy into multiple forms, some containing matter and others not. All interacting and entangled regardless of space-time. You should revise your understanding of the standard model. I am heavily into QM and my definition of "energy" is the endless possibility for manifestation and transmutation.
TCupUK 5 months ago
@acr08807 It stole my first reply :(.
Time can not be considered without energy in the equation as it is the observance of change that is time and not an actual clock. Before time which is 10-46 there was nothing, everything after this point contains energy. Matter can only be energy, but energy does not have to be matter. Transformation -
TCupUK 5 months ago
@TCupUK Time is one eigenvector of the quantum state of a system. Energy is another eigenvector. I can assure you, they are completely separate in quantum mechanics--one cannot contain the other. No doubt it takes energy to observe time, but that's not the same as saying that time is composed of energy. Anyway, most people don't understand what energy is in physics--it's not a substance, it's the quantity that must be conserved if the laws of physics don't change over time.
acr08807 5 months ago
@acr08807 You are correct that both C and E can be used as an eigenvector to explain quanta's. However this fact does not prove that time can exist independently of energy. Which was the premiss of your argument. Hamiltonian methods are not being questioned. Your statement that time is independent of energy is. How do you reconcile the indeterministic nature of the wave-function collapse? Also as time is considered 4D how do you explain the lack of energy?
Space is 3D, and together = Space-Time
TCupUK 5 months ago
@TCupUK (1) All I'm claiming is that energy and time are equally fundamental in physical law, and that neither one forms any part of the other. (2) I don't claim that wavefunctions collapse, or that, if they do, the collapse is indeterministic. I think you're confusing WFC and decoherence. (3) In QM there is no energy component to time, for the same reason there is no grapefruit component. They are just different things. Heisenberg uncertainty simply does not work if time contains energy.
acr08807 5 months ago
@TCupUK (1) All I'm claiming is that energy and time are equally fundamental in physical law, and that neither one forms any part of the other. (2) I don't claim that wavefunctions collapse, or that, if they do, the collapse is indeterministic. I think you're confusing WFC and decoherence. (3) In QM there is no energy component to time, for the same reason there is no grapefruit component. They are just different things. Heisenberg uncertainty simply does not work if time contains energy.
acr08807 5 months ago
@acr08807 I can not see how you fail to grasp that time is an observation of an action.! Both the action and the act of observing involve energy.
You do understand that QM is a scientific field and not a theory right?
Time can not exist without an observer to record it, it is a perception.
TCupUK 5 months ago
@TCupUK I'm a physicist. My field is topological quantum field theory. I know what QM is--it IS a theory, and there is also a field that studies it. My field as it happens. Nothing in QM requirers an observer. I understand why you're confused--QM isn't hard to understand, but it takes a mathematics background that few persons have, and I do love your curiosity about the subject.
acr08807 5 months ago
@acr08807 Your field fascinates me. Would I be close if i said that you deal with the logical heirarchies and structures that QM predicts may have an influence on as yet unobserved phenomena? I can't remember, it's not Planks ZPE radiation thing, but it has to do with empty space at the quantum level in regards to dark energy. I had a question but have gone blank..will reply.
breaneainn 5 months ago
@acr08807 Care to share your name so I can read up on your work?
I am still struggling to understand your concept of time, do you know of any scholar articles that support your view point of time?
I will leave the observer point for now, mainly because of the ambiguity associated with the word. However we do know by provable tests that the act of observing effects the results, I am sure you are more than aware of the two slit experiment and its implications.
TCupUK 5 months ago
@TCupUK I do way too much trolling on youtube to tell anyone who I am. Anyway, my work is only intelligible to a small set of specialists. If you tell me what your background in math and physics are, I can point you to appropriate references. One thing to remember, though, is that QM is just a model. Whatever energy and time are (we physicists don't understand time any better than anyone else, and you wouldn't believe what our concept of energy is if I told you), they aren't math.
acr08807 5 months ago
@acr08807 I have a BSc in computer science and consider myself to have a good mathematical understanding. I would be pursing my love of astro and particle physics if not for my illness. I consider myself kept up to date with current conceptions in this field. I also understand the lack of agreement in this field regarding many things that the lay man considers to be indisputable fact. Time itself is a funny thing because it seems all most impossible to conceive of it prior to the BB/Inflation.
TCupUK 5 months ago
@TCupUK Great, a science/math background makes it much easier. Conceptually, every physicist has trouble thinking about time at or before the Big Bang, because we don't have a quantum mechanical theory of gravity. To me, "lack of agreement" means "we don't know and have a bunch of untested hypotheses." Then again, I think "agreement" just means "we have a model that explains everything we've seen so far but we don't really know what's going on."
acr08807 5 months ago
@TCupUK So, anyway, now you see my bias. If there are nine "interpretations" of quantum mechanics and they all make exactly the same predictions, I'm not spending time thinking about which one (if any) is "right." George Greenstein and Arthur Zajonc wrote a great book called The Quantum Challenge that approaches QM this way, but it assumes knowledge of QM at the level of an undergrad QM course. Let me think about how to get you there quickly.
acr08807 5 months ago
@acr08807 :) Fascinating choice of book to recommend.
Page 61 fig3.4 The Energy time uncertainty relation.
" It can be seen that the atom "breaths" in and out, expanding and contracting over a time scale of order ▲t=h/▲E."
" But for times long relative to ▲t, they change significantly. Thus, the rate of change an observable is set by the uncertainty in its energy"
Maybe I am wrong but I thought this implied that Time is relative to Energy?
TCupUK 5 months ago
@TCupUK That's exactly the critical relationship. The essential idea is that the uncertainty of the the rate of change of the energy of a process is proportional to the length of time it takes for that process to occur. If we know the time over which the process occurs precisely, we have the most uncertainty as to the change in the system's energy as it undergoes that process. However, if time is made from energy, then specifying the time over which the process occurs tells us
acr08807 5 months ago
@TCupUK something about the change in energy because it tells us about the change in the energy component of the change in time. I realize that may sound like doubletalk, which is why I'm trying to find an economical way to make the math more precise to you. I need to think about that and report back. BTW, this leads to the best physics joke ever. Q: How is quantum mechanics like sex? A: When I've got the time, I don't have the energy.
acr08807 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TCupUK, "energy is the fundamental of everything." I'm not sure I agree. What about extension?
semasiologistics 5 months ago
@TCupUK Why does it have to be an intelligence? And, once again, what caused the intelligence?
outlaw87100 5 months ago