Scientific Theories

Scientific Theories. Randall Niles explores scientific laws/truths that seem to be at odds with one another, such as entropy and evolution or quantum uncertainty, determinism, and free will.

Visit http://www.allaboutthejourney.org to look further at the tradeoff between scientific theories, laws, and truths.

Also, go to http://www.RandallNiles.com/videos.htm to watch more videos on scientific theories and their philosophical implications.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Scientific Theories
• Scientific Theory
• Scientific Laws
• Entropy
• Evolution
• Quantum Uncertainty
• Free Will
• Determinism
• Randall Niles

[reflect7]

Dear scientists: I understand my comparisons don't fit within the box. The concept here is to extend scientific principles into philiosophical discussion. Ex., can a true, naturalistic, materialistic scientist believe in human free will? Of course not. Everything is deterministic matter in motion. I understand that entropy is a physics concept, not biology. However, if entropy is acting on the matter underlying the biology, help me with the process that produces more order/information over time.

[Warthaug]

Aww, he deleted my comment. Guess the truth hurts...

[reflect7]

The comments are fine -- Just re-post without cuss words and four-letter rhetoric. Thanks.

[Warthaug]

Stupid and idiotic are not cuss words, and both have more than 4 letters.

Anyhow, evolution does not violate the second law of thermodynamics (hint: entropy does not equal "randomness", and the earth isn't a closed system). The rest of your comments vis-a-vis scientific theories are equally poorly founded, and display a complete misunderstanding of science on your part, rather than problems with science itself.

[reflect7]

Help me out here... Is earth an open system because of the sun? Is it the energy of the sun that combats entropy, adds order, and increases information in the genome? If I frapped a frog in a blender and created a frothy mess of amino acids, proteins, chemicals, and genetic material... then placed this frothy mess (with all components of frog life) in the sun for a few billion years, what would I get? I have no problem with science itself and did I really say entropy equals randomness...?

[crissyhowes]

wow you are closed minded , OK we started of as a simple organism , we got more complicated ,got it so far , now we have wars

bombs global warming , you could say ,whats the word CAIOS, its not complicated to see if your open minded to more than ,OH OH god made it its magic.

[reflect7]

Where did you get the simple organism? You all seem to be smart scientists with absolute knowledge of molecular biology, chemistry, physics, genetics, etc. Therefore, you understand the complexity of so-called simple life. How did we go from a rock to self-replicating, energy-processing life? How about first consciousness, first rationality...?

[rilo154]

@crissyhowes

...why would a simple organism feel any need to become more complex?..

A simple organism miraculously appearing would be a miracle in and of itself - what more could such a simplistic organism hope for?...

[bellyzbad]

were not at the quontum level the quontum level is soooo small

[Juanster23]

We live in a paradoxical universe and we gotta learn to accept paradox. I don't think we are yet capable of comprehending all these paradoxes in their entirety and expressing them in a conceputal fashion using language. Funnily enough, I think in the end, there is no such thing as a paradox. What we perceive as a paradox is just the minds limited incapability of comprehending reality.

[HKNajjar]

90% of the people that commented here think they're all so smart. Well, there's one thing you all never learned; which is respectful manners in discussion. reflect7, you are going to be attacked forever until you abandon any discussion about God, they're just so bitter bro, good luck.

[MovieFinatic456]

I swear if you have a debate with Steven Hawking they should totally televise it. It will be the most epic thing EVER! I'm an Agnostic but I respect people who have strong faith in their beliefs. I think you are the definition of true believer. As I said before, I respect that. Good luck for the future.

[benthemiester]

Don't worry Niles, Darwin wasn't a scientist either.

[LetReasonPrevail1]

The fact that we can activily avoid future events is remarkable. It can be said that intelligence is measure of how good we are at reducing the inevitability of possible future events.

So to believe in the overall deterministic nature of the universe is in no way inconsistent with believing free will exists within our lives.

[LetReasonPrevail1]

Next, we must define inevitable. Simply put, inevitable means unavoidable. So to avoid certain events from happening in the future, you have to be an agent with the capability to take actions to avoid said event. And we as humans are certainly agents that can take action to avoid future events from ocurring.

[LetReasonPrevail1]

No free will is another false dilema that is presented by theists. To say that atheists are saything that the future is inevitable means nothing. The future will happen regardless, so to say the future is inevitable means nothing. To talk about the inevitablility of something in a meaningful way is to talk about the inevitability of certain events happening.

[LetReasonPrevail1]

Lesson #1: The earth is not a closed system. Energy is added to earth's closed system via the Sun.

Make sense?

Now, either you haven't taken the time to research this very easy to find information, or you are being opening dishonest in presenting this question as though it hasn't been answered definitively.

So which is it? Are you dishonest or just plain lazy?