1. Illinois
    Joined
    20 Mar '07
    Moves
    6266
    18 Sep '07 00:443 edits
    Here is another excerpt which I believe many here will find worthy of discussion. This is from Dr. Charles Missler's book, Prophecy 20/20, chapter 2, "The Boundaries of Our Reality."

    Enjoy...

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

    "One of the most significant discoveries of twentieth-century science is that the universe is finite. Furthermore, it had a beginning. That fact has led to the various conjectures collectively known as the Big Bang Theory.

    "We know from the laws of thermodynamics that energy travels from hot to cold. All processes in the universe inevitably contribute the losses from their inefficiencies to the ambient temperature. If the universe was infinite, the present ambient temperature would be uniform. It is not; therefore, it had a beginning, and it will ultimately suffer a "heat death" when the ambient temperature is uniform and no more heat transfers can occur.

    "The finiteness of our macrocosm is one of the sobering realities of modern astrophysics. Mankind, therefore, finds itself trapped within the finite interval between the "singularity" that began it all and a finite termination.

    "In the microcosmic domain, there also appears to be an even more astonishing boundary to smallness. Perhaps even more dramatic, and paradoxical in its consequences, has been the discovery of the "finiteness" of the microcosm, the advent of quantum physics.

    "We easily imagine that if we take a length of something and divide it in half, we can then take the remainder and divide that in half again. We naturally assume that, conceptually, at least, we could do that ad infinitum. Whatever we have left we assume can be divided again. But it turns out that isn't so. When we get down to 10 to the -33 centimeters it cannot be further divided. (Physicists call that the Planck length.) Dividing it further causes it to "lose locality." It turns out that length - and virtually every other measure we explore - is quantized. It is made up of indivisible units, or quanta. That's why they call the study of all this quantum physics.

    "This turns out to be true for our three spatial dimensions: mass, energy, and even time itself. There is no briefer periord than 10 to the -43 seconds.

    "The philosophical implications of quantum theory are profoundly disturbing. Among the startling discoveries made by quantum physicists is that if you break matter - or energy or time - into smaller and smaller pieces, you eventually reach a point where those pieces (electrons, protons, etc.) no longer possess the traits of objects. Although they can sometimes behave as if they were compact little particles, physicists have found that they literally possess no dimension.

    "Another observation, even by "secular" scientists, is that the more we understand the universe, the more it appears as if it were specifically designed for man. There are literally hundreds of dimensions or ratios that, if varied even slightly, would make life impossible. If the earth were a little closer - or a little more distant - from the sun, it would be too hot or too cold to support life. If it rotated a little faster - or a little slower - life would be impossible. This applies to cosmological factors in our solar system, as well as key ratios in subatomic particles.

    "If the gravity of the earth at its surface were weaker, we would not have an adequate atmosphere; if it were stronger, our atmosphere would contain too much ammonia.

    "If the electromagnetic coupling constant were either weaker or stronger, molecules for life would cease to exist. As physicists examine the strong nuclear force coupling constant, it turns out that if it were only slightly weaker, multiproton nuclei would not hold together and hydrogen would be the only element in the universe. The supply of various life-essential elements heavier than iron would be insufficient. If they were only slightly stronger, nuclear particles would tend to bond together more frequently and more firmly, and hydrogen would be rare in the universe. Either way, with less than a 1 percent change, life would be impossible.

    "If the weak nuclear force coupling constant were increased, there would be no helium or heavy elements; if it were increased, there would be an overabundance of heavy elements.

    "A June 2005 article in Scientific American on the inconstancy of constants has even suggested that our physical universe is but a shadow of a larger reality - something that the Bible has maintained all along.

    "A further realization is that our position in the universe appears to have been tailored for the purpose of discovery: its position in the galaxy, the proportions of the moon and the sun to permit solar eclipses, the uniqueness of the visible spectrum, and dozens of other factors that imply teleology: a heuristic purpose in the overall design.

    "Another discovery of the physicists is that a subatomic particle, such as an electron, can manifest itself as either a particle or a wave. If you shoot an electron at a television screen that has been turned off, a tiny point of light will appear when it strikes the phosphorescent chemicals that coat the glass. The single point of impact that the electron leaves on the screen clearly reveals that particle-like side of its nature.

    "But that is not the only form the electron can assume. It can also dissolve into a blurry cloud of energy and behave as if it were a wave, spread out over space. When an electron manifests itself as a wave it can do things no particle can. If it is fired at a barrier in which two slits have been cut, it can go through both slits simultaneously. When wavelike electrons collide with each other they even create interference patterns.

    "It is interesting that in 1906, J. J. Thomson received the Nobel Prize for proving that electrons are particles. In 1937, he saw his son awarded the Nobel Prize for proving that electrons are waves. Both father and son were correct. From then on, the evidence for the wave/particle duality has become overwhelming. This chameleon-like ability is common to all subatomic particles. Called quanta, they manifest themselves either as particles or waves. What makes them even more astonishing is that there is compelling evidence that the only time quanta ever manifest as particles is when we are looking at them.

    "The Danish physicist Niels Bohr (1885-1962) stated, "Anyone who isn't shocked by quantum physics has not understood it." Bohr pointed out that if subatomic particles only come into existence in the presence of an observer, then it is also meaningless to speak of a particle's properties and characteristics as existing before they are observed. But if the act of observation actually helps create such properties, what does that imply about the future of science?

    "It gets worse. Some subatomic processes result in the creation of a pair of particles with identical or closely related properties. Quantum physics predicts that attempts to measure complementary characteristics on the pair - even when traveling in opposite directions - would always be frustrated. Such strange behavior would imply that they would have to be interconnected in some way so as to be instantaneously in communication with each other.

    "One physicist who was deeply troubled by Bohr's assertions was Albert Einstein. Despite the role Einstein had played in the founding of quantum theory, he was not pleased with the course the fledgling science had taken. In 1935 Einstein and his colleagues Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen published their now famous paper, "Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?"

    "The problem, according to Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, is that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. The instantaneous communication implied by the prevailing view of quantum physics would be tantamount to breaking the time barrier and would open the door to all kinds of unacceptable paradoxes. Einstein and his colleagues were convinced that no "reasonable definition" of reality would permit such faster-than-light interconnections to exist and, therefore, Bohr had to be wrong. Their argument is now known as the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox, or EPR paradox for short.

    "Bohr remained unperturbed by Einstein's argument. Rather than believing that some kind of faster-than-light communication was taking place, he offered another explanation. If sub-atomic particles do not exist until they are observed, then one could no longer think of them as independent "things." Thus Einstein was basing his argument on an error when he viewed twin particles as separate. They were but part of an indivisible system, and it was meaningless to think of them otherwise.

    "In time, most physicists sided with Bohr and became content that his interpretation was correct. One factor that contributed to Bohr's following was that, because quantum physics had proved so spectacularly successful in predicting phenomena, few physicists were willing to even consider the possibility that it might be faulty in some way. Today, entire industries of lasers, microelectronics, and computers have emerged on the reliability of the predictions of quantum physics. The popular Caltech physicist Richard Feynman has summed up this paradox well: "I think it is safe to say that no one understands quantum mechanics . . . In fact, it is often stated that of all the theories proposed in this century, the silliest is quantum theory. Some say that the only thing that quantum theory has going for it, in fact, is that it is unquestionably correct."
  2. Joined
    06 May '07
    Moves
    1610
    18 Sep '07 00:46
    Originally posted by epiphinehas
    Here is another excerpt which I believe many here will find worthy of discussion. This is from Dr. Charles Missler's book, Prophecy 20/20, chapter 2, "The Boundaries of Our Reality."

    Enjoy...

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

    "One of the most significant discoveries of twentieth-century science is that the universe is ...[text shortened]... act, is that it is unquestionably correct."
    so is he saying the Big Bang is true or what???
  3. Illinois
    Joined
    20 Mar '07
    Moves
    6266
    18 Sep '07 00:491 edit
    (cont'd)

    "When Einstein and his colleagues first made their proposal, no empirical experiments had actually been performed, so the broader philosophical implications were ignored and swept under the carpet, for the time being. Then in the 1950s a University of London physicist, David Bohm, a protege of Einstein's and one of the world's most respected quantum physicists, offered evidence to suggest that our world and everything in it are only ghostly images, projections from a level of reality so beyond our own that the real reality is literally beyond both space and time.

    "Bohm's work in plasma physics is considered landmark. While working at the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory, he noticed that in plasmas (gases composed of high density electrons and positive ions) the particles stopped behaving like individuals and started behaving as if they were part of a larger and interconnected whole. Moving to Princeton University in 1947, he continued his work in the behavior of oceans of particles, noting their highly organized overall effects and behavior as if they knew what each of the untold trillions of individual particles was doing. Bohm's sense of the importance of interconnectedness, as well as years of dissatisfaction with the inability of standard theories to explain all of the phenomena encountered in quantum physics, left him searching.

    "While at Princeton, Bohm and Einstein developed a supportive relationship and shared their mutual restlessness regarding the strange implications of current quantum theory. One of the implications of Bohm's view has to do with the nature of location. Bohm's interpretation of quantum physics indicated that at the subquantum level location ceases to exist. All points in space become equal to all other points in space, and it was meaningless to speak of anything as being separate from anything else. Physicists call this property nonlocality.

    "Bohm's ideas left most physicists unpersuaded, but they did stir the interest of a few. One of these was John Stewart Bell, a theoretical physicist at CERN, the European center for atomic research in Geneva, Switzerland. Like Bohm, Bell had become discontented with the quantum theory and felt there had to be some alternative. When Bell encountered Bohm's ideas, he wondered if there was some way of experimentally verifying nonlocality. Freed up by a sabbatical in 1964, he developed an elegant mathematical approach that revealed how such a two-particle experiment could be performed - the now famed Bell Inequality. The only problem was that it required a level of technological precision that was not yet available.

    "To be certain that particles, such as those in the EPR paradox, were not using some normal means of communication, the basic operations of the experiment had to be performed in such an infinitesimally brief instant that there wouldn't be enough time for a ray of light to travel the distance separating the two particles. Light travels at about a foot in a nanosecond (a thousand millionth of a second). This meant that the instruments used in the experiments had to perform all the necessary operations within a few nanoseconds.

    "As technology improved, it was finally possible to perform the two-particle experiment outlined by Bell. In 1982, a landmark experiment was performed by a research team led by physicist Alain Aspect, Jean Dalibard, and Gerard Roger at the Institute of Theoretical and Applied Optics in Paris. They produced a series of twin photons by heating calcium atoms with lasers, and allowed each photon to travel in opposite directions through 6.5 meters of pipe and pass through special filters that directed them towards one of two possible polarization analyzers. It took each filter ten nanoseconds to switch between one analyzer or the other, about thirty nanoseconds less than it took light to travel the entire thirteen meters separating each set of photons. In this way Aspect and his colleagues were able to rule out any possibility of the photons communicating by any known physical process.

    "The experiment succeeded. Just as quantum theory predicted, each photon was still able to correlate its angle of polarization with that of its twin. This meant that either Einstein's ban against faster-than-light communications was being violated or the two photons were nonlocally connected.

    "This experiment demonstrated that the web of subatomic particles that composes our physical universe - the very fabric of "reality" itself - possesses what appears to be an undeniable holographic property. Paul Davis of the University of Newcastle in Tyne, England, observed that since all particles are continually interacting and separating, "the nonlocal aspects of quantum systems is therefore a general property of nature."

    "One of Bohm's most startling suggestions is that the tangible reality of our everyday lives is really a kind of illusion, with similarities to a holographic image. Underlying it is a deeper order of existence, a vast and more primary level of reality that gives birth to all the objects and appearances of our physical world in much the same way that a piece of holographic film gives birth to a hologram. Bohm calls this deeper level of reality the implicate (enfolded) order, and he refers to our level of existence as the explicate (unfolded) order.

    "This view is not inconsistent with the Biblical presentation of our physical world as being subordinate to a larger, transcendent spiritual world, which is the superior reality. "We look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen. For the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal" (2 Cor. 4:18).

    Many physicists remain skeptical of Bohm's ideas. Among those who are sympathetic, however, are Roger Penrose of Oxford, the creator of the modern theory of black holes; Bernard d'Espagnat of the University of Paris, one of the leading authorities on the conceptual foundations of quantum theory; and Cambridge's Brian Josephson, winner of the 1973 Nobel Prize in physics. Josephson believes that Bohm's implicate order may someday even lead to the inclusion of God within the framework of science, an idea Josephson supports.
  4. Standard memberHand of Hecate
    Merciless Vagabond
    Deep in it.
    Joined
    08 Feb '05
    Moves
    14613
    18 Sep '07 13:541 edit
    Originally posted by epiphinehas
    Here is another excerpt which I believe many here will find worthy of discussion. This is from Dr. Charles Missler's book, Prophecy 20/20, chapter 2, "The Boundaries of Our Reality."

    Enjoy...

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

    "One of the most significant discoveries of twentieth-century science is that the universe is act, is that it is unquestionably correct."
    Suh-weet cut and paste work. Did you attend some sort of 12 Step Ivanhoe training program? Please add some pompous, self righteous comments to the beginning and end of your cut and pastes to really drive the message home.

    Thanks.
  5. Illinois
    Joined
    20 Mar '07
    Moves
    6266
    18 Sep '07 15:25
    Originally posted by Hand of Hecate
    Suh-weet cut and paste work. Did you attend some sort of 12 Step Ivanhoe training program? Please add some pompous, self righteous comments to the beginning and end of your cut and pastes to really drive the message home.

    Thanks.
    Actually, it was typed by yours truly (while bored at work). Every word carefully perused for spelling errors.
  6. Standard memberHand of Hecate
    Merciless Vagabond
    Deep in it.
    Joined
    08 Feb '05
    Moves
    14613
    18 Sep '07 15:32
    Originally posted by epiphinehas
    Actually, it was typed by yours truly (while bored at work). Every word carefully perused for spelling errors.
    Well, you need to be more careful.
  7. Joined
    02 Dec '06
    Moves
    19510
    18 Sep '07 18:14
    Can you please explain the point of your post. Are you saying that we live in Socrate's Allegory of the Cave and therefore the bible is true because it is not inconsistent with this viewpoint?
  8. Standard memberSwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    2014.05.01
    Joined
    11 Apr '07
    Moves
    92274
    18 Sep '07 18:22
    Originally posted by epiphinehas
    (cont'd)

    "When Einstein and his colleagues first made their proposal, no empirical experiments had actually been performed, so the broader philosophical implications were ignored and swept under the carpet, for the time being. Then in the 1950s a University of London physicist, David Bohm, a protege of Einstein's and one of the world's most respected ...[text shortened]... God within the framework of science, an idea Josephson supports.
    The author is really s-t-r-e-t-c-h-i-n-g by using quantum physics/cosmology to indicate the existence of God. I think these subjects are interesting enough without using them as a cheap religious persuasion tool.
  9. Subscribermdhall
    Mr Palomar
    A box
    Joined
    25 Sep '06
    Moves
    29433
    18 Sep '07 18:56
    Bad science, bad metaphysics, and worse theology.
  10. Territories Unknown
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    18 Sep '07 19:48
    Originally posted by mdhall
    Bad science, bad metaphysics, and worse theology.
    Do tell. You charge poor scholarship and/or explanation on three fields of study, but very little of theology is mentioned in either of the two posts, and you fail to mention the error(s) regarding the first two fields.
  11. Territories Unknown
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    18 Sep '07 19:50
    Originally posted by epiphinehas
    Actually, it was typed by yours truly (while bored at work). Every word carefully perused for spelling errors.
    Chuck Missler is now a doctor?
  12. Standard memberbuffalobill
    Major Bone
    On yer tail ...
    Joined
    28 Feb '05
    Moves
    16686
    18 Sep '07 20:15
    Originally posted by epiphinehas
    Actually, it was typed by yours truly (while bored at work). Every word carefully perused for spelling errors.
    What does he have to say about superstring theory?
  13. Standard memberbuffalobill
    Major Bone
    On yer tail ...
    Joined
    28 Feb '05
    Moves
    16686
    18 Sep '07 20:21
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    The author is really s-t-r-e-t-c-h-i-n-g by using quantum physics/cosmology to indicate the existence of God. I think these subjects are interesting enough without using them as a cheap religious persuasion tool.
    When magnetism was first discovered as being everywhere, that lead many to feel that the presence of God was all around them. Every generation likes to see the latest science as evidence for the proof of God, because it's mysterious. One wouldn't say that of magnetic fields these days.
  14. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39559
    18 Sep '07 20:45
    As pointed out in this thread many moons ago, http://www.timeforchess.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=67222
    Bohm's ideas are far more compatible and the data you present supportive of Eastern concepts like maya in Hinduism than anything in Christianity.
  15. Subscribermdhall
    Mr Palomar
    A box
    Joined
    25 Sep '06
    Moves
    29433
    18 Sep '07 20:59
    If you are asking me why the above is bad science and bad metaphysics that means one of two things:

    1) you did not read the above posts
    2) you don't know anything about physics and metaphysics

    Just read it and you'll know what I'm saying.
    I didn't want to read it at first either, but it was only after the painful exercise that I realized how right my instincts were.
Back to Top