1. Joined
    13 Jan '08
    Moves
    345
    24 Jan '08 03:02
  2. Joined
    13 Jan '08
    Moves
    345
    24 Jan '08 03:03
    ok first lets start with the basics the two wave thoery states that waves exist when not being obseved
  3. Joined
    13 Jan '08
    Moves
    345
    24 Jan '08 03:101 edit
    ok sry its called the two split thoery and it goes like this



    1) Results of the two-split experiment shows that waves become matter when observed.

    2) The two-split experiment shows that waves exist when not observed.

    3) God / Allah is supposed to observe EVERYTHING, including two-split exepriments.

    4) Since waves exist, they are not being observed.

    5) It follows that God / Allah does not exist, since, if he / she / it did exist, then waves should not exist.

    this is false

    1)first
    however the fact that they exist when they are not obsevered proves theory wrong because in order for this to be known. they would have to observe it. thus proving the thoery wrong because, they cant prove that it exists while not being observed while all the while observing waves to prove that they exist while not being observed. they cant prove it with out observing it. so the thoery only proves itself wrong


    2) second
    waves do exist while being obsevered or we would not know what they look like or that they exist so god could observe them and they still exist

    3) third
    the two split theory, is a thoery so its not proven and thus cant be true because as we have seen it is wrong

    4) god does exist
  4. Standard memberDoctorScribbles
    BWA Soldier
    Tha Brotha Hood
    Joined
    13 Dec '04
    Moves
    49088
    24 Jan '08 03:25
    Stick to what you know. I don't know what that is, but I'm sure it's not forum posting or theoretical physics.
  5. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    24 Jan '08 06:31
    Originally posted by curly13
    this is false
    1)first
    however the fact that they exist when they are not obsevered proves theory wrong because in order for this to be known. they would have to observe it. thus proving the thoery wrong because, they cant prove that it exists while not being observed while all the while observing waves to prove that they exist while not being observed. the ...[text shortened]... y so its not proven and thus cant be true because as we have seen it is wrong
    4) god does exist
    Why don't you simplify it and be more honest at the same time.
    1) I believe that God exists and if I come across any claim that he doesn't whether I understand it or not I will say anything however nonsensical to try and disprove said claim. I will also listen to arguments for my position and repeat them to others without actually thinking about them myself.

    If you want an analysis of why most of your post is nonsense I, and others, would be glad to oblige. I assume however, that you are not really interested in knowing whether or not you are talking sense.
  6. Joined
    07 Sep '05
    Moves
    35068
    24 Jan '08 18:441 edit
    I assume this is actually referring to the double-slit experiment?

    It's an impressive feat to condense so many logical flaws into so few words.

    "Words" being used fairly loosely in some cases.
  7. Joined
    16 Aug '06
    Moves
    1514
    24 Jan '08 18:46
    Originally posted by curly133) third
    the two split theory, is a thoery so its not proven and thus cant be true
    brilliant
Back to Top