A
AlNg
Guest
Really? Even if m is the relativistic mass and E is the relativisitic energy?
- Status
O
OurLadyofSorrows
Guest
Do tell ! For 10
M
Michaelangelo
Guest
Using those terms only complicates things. It is much simpler if mass (also called rest mass or invarient mass) does not change regardless of the velocity of the observer. If you start using relativistic definitions then all all of a sudden photons will have mass (since c is constant and they always have energy). Sure you can use relativistic terms but the calculations becomes a mess and you get results that differ from each observer.Michaelangelo:
Really? Even if m is the relativistic mass and E is the relativisitic energy?
M
Michaelangelo
Guest
Sure. Electron + Positron <—> photon + photon.
Et voila! From left to right, matter destroyed. Or from right to left, matter created.
U
upant
Guest
have you read the bible? it is in there
do you disagree with his statement?
what are your thoughts on Jesus rising from the dead?
M
Michaelangelo
Guest
U
upant
Guest
bold mine
to some no amount of evidence would be enough, to others poorly works
you don’t believe in the documented eye witness testimony and the testimony of the lives of the apostles?
M
Michaelangelo
Guest
Saul never saw Yeshua before the execution. So how could he verify that who he claims to have seen is his “visions” is the same guy?
Unverified claims. I would not even be a test subject for a new medicine based upon claims as unsustantiated as these.
Oh I’m all ears if ever presented good evidence. But I will continue to shake my head at poor evidence.
I don’t think there is good support for the claim that those texts are testemonies by the apostles. Claiming divinity of Yeshua I would expect evidence of a totally different caliber than these texts.
U
upant
Guest
if Jesus appeared to you, I believe you would know just like Paul knew.
a lot of what has been written about history is unverified but believed.
what would good evidence be to you?
why write them? the authors were persecuted.
what would you expect from fishermen in the time of Christ?
some have been lucky enough to see a miracle, I pray you will see one someday.
A
AlNg
Guest
Oh so do you claim that photons do not have any mass at all?
Even a very small amount?
How do you explain the supercooled rubidium experiment?
And you did not answer as to whether or not you accept the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, which is important, because according to the Copenhagen interpretation the theory involves bringing people into the measurement process. If there is nothing, how would you bring someone into the measurement process and obtain quantum fluctuations because no one is there if there is nothing around so nothing can be measured. IOW, does it not contradict the Copenhagen interpretation of QM to say that there are non zero quantum fluctuations when no one is there.
R
rossum
Guest
Why does the Bible not explain the composition of the atmosphere of the planet Neptune? Why does the Bible not explain the geography of Australia? Why does the Bible not explain that cholera is caused by Vibrio cholerae?
Religious texts are not in general good sources to answer scientific questions.
The Buddhist answer to a scientific question is to ask a scientist.
O
OurLadyofSorrows
Guest
oh thats a pity , I thought you were going to pick me up on the Ist law of thermodynamics. Which I freely admit I stated from its pop coffee table physics version.
To be correct, which I really should be, this law doesnt state matter can be created or destroyed.
It states that in a closed system, its total energy cannot be created or destroyed. It can be transformed between forms, (which buddhists might like the idea of.)
Your example does not support the total destruction of matter, it supports the Ist law of thermodynamics.
Total destruction of matter is the disappearance completely of that matter or energy if you like. Right out of that closed system.
Show me an example where boom, all gone, never seen again in any form, even in a black hole.
Last edited:
O
OurLadyofSorrows
Guest
I am not asking you what Genesis states about the creation of Hydrogen as the first element. The geography of a continent, (surprised you picked geography and not geology, maybe a mapper? ) the atmosphere of Neptune, or how to contain pathogens Again another strawman
I am asking you how buddhism explains the appearance of the first element we have mapped.
I do find these strawmans entertaining though. Especially the choice of geography of a continent.
We could do the study of geography for any religion and come up with some fascinating results that could include these natural land bridges.
A
AlNg
Guest
How do you know that the scientist will give you the right answer. And different scientists will give you different answers. Which answer is right? For example, some physicists will say that space time is discrete others will say that it is continuous. What good does it do you to ask a scientist a question about this?
Similarly in mathematics.
R
rossum
Guest
And I am answering you that the Buddhist explanation of that is the same as the Biblical explanation of the atmosphere of Neptune.
I cannot add new words to the Tripitaka, any more than you can add new words to the Bible. What is not there is not there. What the Tripitaka does have is the reason why the answer to your question is not found: the Simsapa sutta.
Where is the Bible’s explanation for why it does not give the composition of Neptune’s atmosphere?
R
rossum
Guest
I can say the same about all religions, Buddhism included. Not all Buddhists agree on everything; not all Christians agree on everything.
H
Hume
Guest
Huh.
I’ve had a few years of chem and phys at university but was by no means a major.
Is this one of those things that doesn’t get sprung on you until junior or senior classes (which I never took, as a non-major)?
I’ve had a few years of chem and phys at university but was by no means a major.
Is this one of those things that doesn’t get sprung on you until junior or senior classes (which I never took, as a non-major)?
Last edited:
H
Hume
Guest
Love it. 10 char
M
Michaelangelo
Guest
Sorry for the delay in my reply. I had a lot on my plate today and there was a couple of things I wanted to check in order to provide a good answer. Will be back…
M
Michaelangelo
Guest
Oh really? Please, do explain.Michaelangelo:
Your example does not support the total destruction of matter, it supports the Ist law of thermodynamics.
The system that is representated by the equation have matter on one side and on the other side there is no matter. Kindly explain where the matter is on the right side? And you never stated in your original claim that it was about a closed system. Are there any more goal posts you want to move? Please let me know now if there are. Because if that is the case there is no point for me wasting time writing a reply, if what I’m replying to has changed.
The particles in the equation above are utterly destroyed and will never be seen again. The same happens with a positron emitted from the radioactive potassium in a banana when it interacts with a electron in the banana and they are annihilated. That means wiped from existence.
- Status