2 questions for atheists

[TheOldNorth]

God by definition is timeless. God by definition just is. If such God exists it is rightfully mind boggling as it should be, just as infinite regress is mind boggling (what you described, but let's apply it to the Unverse) or eternal Universe would be mind boggling etc. Whatever the case is it is mind boggling and in every case you need to deal with eternity and infinity and just make peace with it. I don't see why God has to be singled out.

well there by it makes even less sense at least to believe in such a thing with no evidence, just because someone else believes in it. The TRUE scientific method states that the answer with the least baseless assumption is more likely to be true, and you have to assume a lot of things in a creation story with no evidence. Things like evolution and the natural creation of the solar system and galaxy are explainable to a good degree by modern science (though modern science isn't perfect as it is very politically motivated)

[Insuperable]

well there by it makes even less sense at least to believe in such a thing with no evidence, just because someone else believes in it. The TRUE scientific method states that the answer with the least baseless assumption is more likely to be true, and you have to assume a lot of things in a creation story with no evidence. Things like evolution and the natural creation of the solar system and galaxy are explainable to a good degree by modern science (though modern science isn't perfect as it is very politically motivated)

Put all of that aside. I am not talking about that. I was referring to part of your posts about God. Who created the creator part. An old and boring argument.

[pulstar]

So much effort for so little reward... and no real all-emcompassing answers.

I know the answer to all these questions... and you can, too. The answer's name is Jesus. He is the one who created you, me and this universe. And the more you find out about Jesus, in particular getting to know him personally, the more fulfilled a human being you will be... because he will share all the answers to life's most itriguing questions to you personally. It's awesome to know Jesus.

The effort was worth the price.

That is why all great physicists (Feynman, Laughlin, Phillip Anderson etc) disliked string theory from the beginning. Although it probably had to done sooner or later, it just didn't seem fit for them. But over the years scientists realized that string theory and supersymmetry are interconnected and could be combined into supersymmetric string theories. These theories have also been ruled out by CERN. Scientists had great hopes for them and now theoretical particle physics is in crisis waiting for another Einsteins, Heisenberg etc. Lower energy supersymmetric models have been developed like I wrote and they came out empty. But to be 100% honest they are not 100% percent ruled out because theoretical scientists dealing with these theories can always tweak a theory saying that higher energy is needed for supersymmetric particle detection, but that sort of is the problem. Money is limited and accelerators are expensive. What is science then? Also, string theory required negative cosmological constant. By the end of the last century it turned out that it is positive. It was a great blow to the string theory. Of course physicists are always trying to find a way out, but I mean experiments cost money and time could be used for the development of the more mainstream viable physics.

String theory and supersymmetric theories reproduce equations of General Relativity, that is General Relativity is a special case of these theories and plus they combine all known forces. Wonderful. But there are other theories of quantum gravity that do just that and the most perspective nowadays of all theories from my understanding is the Asymptotically Safe Gravity and it might also be combined with the rest of forces. Entropic gravity also reduces to the General Relativity etc meaning string theory and supersymmetry are not anymore that special in that regard.



I guess you can say that.



I don't understand the math behind the string theory, only conceptually and superficially. Like someone is interested in fashion, games, cars etc this fundamental physics interests me as a layman. So from time to time i tune in to see what is going on because these are interesting times now for those who are informed. Nowadays scientists have their own blogs, youtube channels etc. It is interesting.

I went into both quantum mechanics, quantum field theory and both general and special theory of relativity. Its quite heavy mathematical stuff - tensors, Fourier analysis, functionals, Hilbert space, and in general lots of complex analysis, linear algebra and discrete mathematics, and that's just the start of it. Ok, I've not dealt with mathematics in string theory and related fields (just touched some concepts) so I'm keeping my view reserved. However, I'm going to say most folks would not be able to grasp this stuff, and thus I have respect for those that do, and so I'd not call those scientists average in any way, but its not like they can't go wrong. Einstein went wrong, Newton didn't knew how to describe some phenomenons he noted. Its ok to make an error, people learn by making errors, but its not right to hold down the progress of the whole civilization because you don't want to say you've made an err.

I was responding to his first post only and M-theory has nothing to do with this.The only way M-theory has anything to do with this is if you postulate that God or Gods are the ruler(s) of infinite dimensions or something but that still fails occam's razor. The only thing from physics applicable to this question is the anthropic principle. This is largely a biological and chemistry question hence why there are more biology scientists that are atheists than physicists hence Richard Dawkins.

I know about the problem in physics I first read about it starting like 2 or 3 years ago.

Alright, I just said that because he was later talking about multiverse theories in other comments.

[Nurzat]

one could say I am an Atheist since I am not a believer but I don't even consider myself an Atheist since I have no interest in the topic and I just ignore it.

btw, I do go to church, my wife is religious, so I am speaking not about the rituals which I follow (without believing) but about the belief itself.

[Sacrificed Ram]

This thread was made with a lot of presumptions. Be atheist doesn't mean be a blind follower of science, some atheists ignore science and some even reject.

[JamesBond007]

God by definition is timeless. God by definition just is. If such God exists it is rightfully mind boggling as it should be, just as infinite regress is mind boggling (what you described, but let's apply it to the Unverse) or eternal Universe would be mind boggling etc. Whatever the case is it is mind boggling and in every case you need to deal with eternity and infinity and just make peace with it. I don't see why God has to be singled out.

Why is God considered an explanation for anything? It’s not - it’s a failure to explain, a shrug of the shoulders, an ‘I dunno’ dressed up in spirituality and ritual. If someone credits something to God, generally what it means is that they haven’t a clue, so they’re attributing it to an unreachable, unknowable sky-fairy. Ask for an explanation of where that bloke came from, and odds are you’ll get a vague, pseudo-philosophical reply about having always existed, or being outside nature. Which, of course, explains nothing.

—“Ben”, from an entry on his “Religion is Bullshit” blog, p. 134

[JamesBond007]

This thread was made with a lot of presumptions. Be atheist doesn't mean be a blind follower of science, some atheists ignore science and some even reject.

True but it seems to me that the atheists that ingore science are probably a minority.

[Joso]

Because it's naturally possible?and the fact that it happened a matter of statistics?
Also wanting to go back to "dust and rocks" exists ,it's called death drive...

So all what these suicidal feelings are js just a missing of home?

[Sacrificed Ram]

Living is a slow motion suicide.

[Karol Klačansky]

well religions do have answers.... doesn't mean they're true or have any evidence to back them up though

you want me to differentiate between different types of Atheists, but lump all religions together.