Scientific proof of God.

[JackQ]

In physics, a photon is an elementary particle, the quantum of the electromagnetic interaction and the basic unit of light and all other forms of electromagnetic radiation. In other words a photon is a little packet of energy which can carry electromagnetic radiation. It is also the force carrier for the electromagnetic force. The effects of this force are easily observable at both the microscopic and macroscopic level, because the photon has no rest mass; this allows for interactions at long distances. Like all elementary particles, photons are currently best explained by quantum mechanics and will exhibit wave–particle duality, exhibiting properties of both waves and particles. For example, a single photon may be refracted by a lens or exhibit wave interference with itself, but also act as a particle giving a definite result when quantitative momentum is measured.

Thanks for the information. So would you say that something has to have “rest mass” in order to qualify as physical?

 

[GreggAlvarez]

Gregg, you are making a good point here about accepting, with a high degree of certainty, a “belief” that certain repeated observable empirical events have a truth to them. This is different from faith in God, where one does not have repeated observable empirical data to refer to to assess the truth of the assertion that there is a God. I “believe” that when I step out of bed I will not float to the ceiling, because that has not happened once in the prior 50 years of my getting out of bed each day. But that is very different from saying that I “believe” that there is a God that hears my prayers. I have no repeated empirical experience to bolster the latter “belief.”

What I am talking about is not just “a high degree of certainty.” Nor am I talking about repeated observable empirical events. Nor am I talking sheer knowledge. Nor am I talking about mere facts. I am about believing something without sufficient evidence with unshakable certitude. When I speak about Faith, I am talking about something passed even this certitude. Faith transcends belief. Belief transcends knowledge. We use knowledge for belief. We use belief for Faith. We even use Faith for belief and belief for knowledge.

I guess this is just my opinion and I respectfully disagree with yours. In any case, we do have repeated empirical evidence, but it is WAY too insufficient for our “superior” minds. We are not content with mere evidence because we can interpret it however we wish. I hope I am not coming off as rude. This is just the type of conversation I do well in. And this is just my opinion. I could be wrong. But it makes sense to me.

I steered away from using God to Freethinker anyway. I just want him or her to have more faith in his or her own everyday beliefs.

God bless.

 

[Robert_Burns]

Science can prove that non physical things exist. Think of light, sound, x-rays, etc.

But can Science prove the life force that animates a body. Certainly the body of a living creature is observable when alive but at the instant of its death - what then occured that no longer allows that body to function or take it a step further - how is that Body originally animated in the womb from strictly physical cell structure.

 

[Robert_Burns]

Science can prove that non physical things exist. Think of light, sound, x-rays, etc.

Like the “GOD” Particle - The Higgs boson is a hypothetical massive elementary particle predicted to exist by the Standard Model of particle physics? So why is it so difficult to isolate?

 

[larkin31]

What I am talking about is not just “a high degree of certainty.” Nor am I talking about repeated observable empirical events. Nor am I talking sheer knowledge. Nor am I talking about mere facts. I am about believing something without sufficient evidence with unshakable certitude. When I speak about Faith, I am talking about something passed even this certitude. Faith transcends belief. Belief transcends knowledge. We use knowledge for belief. We use belief for Faith. We even use Faith for belief and belief for knowledge.

I guess this is just my opinion and I respectfully disagree with yours. In any case, we do have repeated empirical evidence, but it is WAY too insufficient for our “superior” minds. We are not content with mere evidence because we can interpret it however we wish. I hope I am not coming off as rude. This is just the type of conversation I do well in. And this is just my opinion. I could be wrong. But it makes sense to me.

I steered away from using God to Freethinker anyway. I just want him or her to have more faith in his or her own everyday beliefs.

God bless.

I actually think that we are agreeing with our definitions, Gregg. No offense taken at all; you are both sincere and polite. Have a good day.

 

[Roman_Korvinus]

First off I don’t think God would be so petty as to be defined by a religion. To me faith is nothing more than a self reflection of ones own vanity. And with that being said, I can say that I have seen no greater abominatin than those who would label one as an outcast.

As far as Scientific proof goes. There indeed is proof in reguards to the metatphorical aspects of sacred geometry. Indeed most of the biblical writings are nothing more than depictions of geometric progressions which is attributed to all religions, not just Christianity.

When it comes to science, one has but to link dimensions, and with that cymatics, geometry, music and the many other areas of thought and understanding that happens simultaniously once that single point is reflected into the multiple dimensions.

I am in the process of writing a book and I do indeed show, not just write about, the various stages and use biblical scripture to prove my points. A lot of what people consider as evil or wicked, or even good for that matter, is nothing more than the symbols used in describing that prosess. The serpent in the tree is no different that the dividing of the Mount of Olives, or the firmament in heaven. The intent of the writers however justifies themselves though malice and treachery by the way that these simple geometric meatphores and reflections to cast the fear of God in the hearts of people. I acn in no way see why this was done other than for monetary gain.

 

[david_friol_1]

Thanks for the information. So would you say that something has to have “rest mass” in order to qualify as physical?

Photons do not have a rest mass as the article that I posted shows however I’ll restate the relevant part: “The effects of this force are easily observable at both the microscopic and macroscopic level, because the photon has no rest mass; this allows for interactions at long distances”
I suppose that is what I meant when I said that light is physical, that it can be “observed” by scientific methods. God can not, so back to my original question;How can science be an accurate means to prove whether something non-physical (non-observable) exists?
I don’t think Freethinker83 wants to talk about this any more but maybe you will JackQ

 

[larkin31]

First off I don’t think God would be so petty as to be defined by a religion. To me faith is nothing more than a self reflection of ones own vanity. And with that being said, I can say that I have seen no greater abominatin than those who would label one as an outcast.

As far as Scientific proof goes. There indeed is proof in reguards to the metatphorical aspects of sacred geometry. Indeed most of the biblical writings are nothing more than depictions of geometric progressions which is attributed to all religions, not just Christianity.

When it comes to science, one has but to link dimensions, and with that cymatics, geometry, music and the many other areas of thought and understanding that happens simultaniously once that single point is reflected into the multiple dimensions.

I am in the process of writing a book and I do indeed show, not just write about, the various stages and use biblical scripture to prove my points. A lot of what people consider as evil or wicked, or even good for that matter, is nothing more than the symbols used in describing that prosess. The serpent in the tree is no different that the dividing of the Mount of Olives, or the firmament in heaven. The intent of the writers however justifies themselves though malice and treachery by the way that these simple geometric meatphores and reflections to cast the fear of God in the hearts of people. I acn in no way see why this was done other than for monetary gain.

Profit motive for the originators of ancient scripture???

 

[Cat_Herder]

I am in the process of writing a book and I do indeed show, not just write about, the various stages and use biblical scripture to prove my points. A lot of what people consider as evil or wicked, or even good for that matter, is nothing more than the symbols used in describing that prosess. The serpent in the tree is no different that the dividing of the Mount of Olives, or the firmament in heaven. The intent of the writers however justifies themselves though malice and treachery by the way that these simple geometric meatphores and reflections to cast the fear of God in the hearts of people. I acn in no way see why this was done other than for monetary gain.

Profit motive for the originators of ancient scripture???

Why don’t the two of you start a thread… I’m not a gambling man but seeing as the NT urges selling all possessions to feed the poor, I can guess who will win.

 

[Michael_Francis]

Sticky: Temporary Ban on Evolution/Atheism Threads