Posts by ninjaturtle

16

Strong Anthropic Principal or. . .

by ninjaturtle in

jw
friends

explain that away, mr. scientist!.

it has been widely noticed that various physical constants and parameters are just exactly those needed to permit life.

some of these include the strength of gravity, the strength of the strong nuclear force, the density of the universe, etc.. [see, for instance, http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~js/21st_century_science/lectures/lec25.html].

ninjaturtle

Well we are talking about things like stars not igniting, or no elements higher than lithium being formed, or no stable orbits being possible.

But yes, you have raised a different objection, that intelligent life is easy to create. Do you believe that?

Or do you say that's just the way it is? Well if so, that's not a very scientific attitude.

<b>The six numbers lurk in the universe's smallest and largest structures. To select one from the small end: The nucleus of a helium atom weighs 99.3 percent as much as the two protons and the two neutrons that fuse to make it. The remaining .7 percent is released mainly as heat. So the fuel that powers the sun— the hydrogen gas at its core— converts .007 of its mass into energy when it fuses into helium. That number is a function of the strength of the force that "glues" together the parts of an atomic nucleus.

So what? Consider this: If the number were only a mite smaller— .006 instead of .007— a proton could not bond to a neutron, and the universe would consist only of hydrogen. No chemistry, no life. And if it were slightly larger, just .008, fusion would be so ready and rapid that no hydrogen would have survived from the Big Bang.</b>

http://www.discover.com/nov_00/featlife.html

16

Strong Anthropic Principal or. . .

by ninjaturtle in

jw
friends

explain that away, mr. scientist!.

it has been widely noticed that various physical constants and parameters are just exactly those needed to permit life.

some of these include the strength of gravity, the strength of the strong nuclear force, the density of the universe, etc.. [see, for instance, http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~js/21st_century_science/lectures/lec25.html].

ninjaturtle

explain that away, Mr. Scientist!

It has been widely noticed that various physical constants and parameters are just exactly those needed to permit life. Some of these include the strength of Gravity, the strength of the Strong Nuclear Force, the density of the universe, etc.

[See, for instance, http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~js/21st_century_science/lectures/lec25.html]

In fact, it is so unlikely that life could exist in a randomly chosen Universe that many (including myself) think that these parameters must have been chosen by a supernatural Creator.

Here are some alternative hypotheses and my comments:

1. We are just extremely lucky. Here you have to assume that the probability that a Creator exists to be zero.

2. String Theory will show that these constants and parameters are not arbitrary, but have to be what they are. String Theory is just a particular bit of mathematics which may end up describing the Universe perfectly, but we still will have a question about why this particular bit is the one the Universe happens to obey.

3. There are actually many universes with different "laws of physics". We necessarily are in one which supports life. This seems to be the strongest argument. However, all of these other Universes are in principle undetectable. It can never bedemonstrated that they exist. The mathematics which supports such a theory has to be accepted just as much on Faith as a Christian accepts the Bible.

7

Fantasy theories

by ninjaturtle in

jw
friends

evolutionists like to point out that there was 4 billion years for evolution to play with.. but consider http://uk.news.yahoo.com/010222/80/b5mxs.html.

it looks like 90% of natural selection was wiped out and the random mutations had to start working with a much smaller base only 250 million years ago.

ninjaturtle

BTW, I'm no creationist, and I don't have any third way version I'm trying to sell. I think there must be something which induces order and perhaps even teleology in the world.

I heard that scientists studying the Sun in the 19th Century concluded it was due to burn out in 1950. They of course knew nothing of nuclear fusion. I think that there is some marvel that science knows nothing of, and that scientists are forced to announce results that will look pretty silly if we ever discover that marvel.

7

Fantasy theories

by ninjaturtle in

jw
friends

evolutionists like to point out that there was 4 billion years for evolution to play with.. but consider http://uk.news.yahoo.com/010222/80/b5mxs.html.

it looks like 90% of natural selection was wiped out and the random mutations had to start working with a much smaller base only 250 million years ago.

ninjaturtle

I feel I have a reasonable grasp of the role of chance in evolution. The chromosomes have to mutate. To get from an amoeba to a human there have to be a lot of mutations (I am guessing). Insofar as there is no specific goal and the mutations are much more likely to make the amoeba less fit. Evolving from an amoeba into a man, or anything of comparable complexity, is really unlikely.

Now it seems to me that these things can, in principle, be calculated and measured. Perhaps now that the human genome is mapped we can start measuring just how unlikely it is for an amoeba to evolve into a creature of human-like complexity and multiply this probability by the number of years.

Question: If such a calculation were made and the probability turned out to be 10%, would you start to doubt evolution, how about .00001% ?

Question: Is evolution falsifiable?

7

Fantasy theories

by ninjaturtle in

jw
friends

evolutionists like to point out that there was 4 billion years for evolution to play with.. but consider http://uk.news.yahoo.com/010222/80/b5mxs.html.

it looks like 90% of natural selection was wiped out and the random mutations had to start working with a much smaller base only 250 million years ago.

ninjaturtle

Evolutionists like to point out that there was 4 billion years for evolution to play with.

But consider http://uk.news.yahoo.com/010222/80/b5mxs.html

it looks like 90% of natural selection was wiped out and the random mutations had to start working with a much smaller base only 250 million years ago.

14

Avoiding JWs

by MoeJoJoJo in

jw
friends

i am so sick of being bothered by jws(we are inactive);every weekend we can count on someone from the hall stopping by either saturday or sunday.

it makes me mad because i know they are counting time with me.

a sister from the hall just called to see what is wrong, why we haven't been to meetings.

ninjaturtle

If you got your lazy asses back to meetings, maybe you wouldn't have to worry about avoiding the brothers. Your only opportunity to worship your Creator directly is at meetings and you're missing out on it. What a darn shame.

3

what pgs. are we considering in our bookstudy?

by ninjaturtle in

jw
friends

what pages and paragraphs are we considering in our bookstudy this week?

thanks.

ninjaturtle

what pages and paragraphs are we considering in our bookstudy this week? Thanks.

31

Well, I'm DA'd Now! :)

by rem in

jw
friends

my judicial meeting took place on monday night.

i was a bit annoyed because the meeting centered on my private beliefs - things that i've already spoken to the elders about in the past many times before.

i don't think i handled myself as well as i wanted to, but i guess i did ok under the circumstances.