Sciense is a religion by itself.

[socratus]

Sciense is a religion by itself.
Why?
Becouse the God can create and govern the Universe
only using physical laws, formulas, equations.
Here is the scheme of His plane.
=.
God : Ten Scientific Commandments.
§ 1. Vacuum: T=0K, E= ∞ ,p= 0, t=∞ .
§ 2. Particles: C/D=pi=3,14, R/N=k, E/M=c^2, h=0, i^2=-1.
§ 3. Photon: h=1, c=1, h=E/t, h=kb.
§ 4. Electron: h*=h/2pi, E=h*f , e^2=ach* .
§ 5. Gravity, Star formation: h*f = kTlogW : HeII -- > HeI -- > H -- > . . .
§ 6. Proton: (p).
§ 7. The evolution of interaction between Photon/Electron and Proton:
a) electromagnetic,
b) nuclear,
c) biological.
§ 8. The Physical Laws:
a) Law of Conservation and Transformation Energy/ Mass,
b) Pauli Exclusion Law,
c) Heisenberg Uncertainty Law.
§ 9. Brain: Dualism of Consciousness.
§ 10. Practice: Parapsychology. Meditation.
===.
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus

[Dimebag]

I would respectfully disagree with your theory that science is a religion. Science has nothing to do with spirituality, and makes no mention on how we "should" act morally. Science aims to make testable predictions about the universe, is in a constant flux with new material constantly being added and old material being revised or corrected, or even removed. Science does not require belief, however if one chooses to believe scientific findings that is their prerogative, however they are free to look into how the findings were drawn, and even free to replicate those findings for themselves. Religion does not allow for this, and instead relies on a person to have faith in canonical concepts or teachings which are rigid and should not be questioned.

Science may form certain truths, however they are not set in stone, are not handed down from an all knowing deity, and do not have repercussions if theses truths are not adhered to. The truths say nothing about how you SHOULD live, only seek to describe the way things are.

As you can see your idea of science being a religion is only that way because it is shaped by the need to be told how to live. Why not decide that for yourself?

[Impenitent]

except for the faith in the belief that the future will resemble the past...

-Imp

[Dimebag]

except for the faith in the belief that the future will resemble the past...

-Imp

Not sure exactly what you mean by this. We all know the universe changes with time, therefore the future is likely not to resemble the past, just look at images of early galaxies compared to more recent ones. This requires no faith, only the curiosity of mind to explore the evidence.

I realise maybe you re referring to prediction. In this case, many explanations we have are ways of predicting trends in data, therefore we can determine roughly the direction that such an observation is trending and extrapolate based on the future with a level of accuracy.

The key is to understand what a certain result really means. If you think scientists know the future, you are mistaken.

[socratus]

Sciense is a religion by itself.
Why?
Becouse the God can create and govern the Universe
only using physical laws, formulas, equations.
Here is the scheme of His plan.
=.
God : Ten Scientific Commandments.
1. Vacuum: T=0K, E= ∞ , p= 0, t=∞ .
2. Particles: C/D=pi=3,14, R/N=k, E/M=c^2, h=0, c=0, i^2=-1, e^i(pi)= -1.
3. Photon: h=1, c=1, h=E/t, h=kb.
4. Electron: h*=h/2pi, E=h*f , e^2=ach* .
5. Gravity, Star formation: h*f = kTlogW : HeII -- > HeI -- > H -- > . . .
6. Proton: (p).
7. The evolution of interaction between Photon/Electron and Proton:
a) electromagnetic,
b) nuclear,
c) biological.
8. The Physical Laws:
a) Law of Conservation and Transformation Energy/ Mass,
b) Pauli Exclusion Law,
c) Heisenberg Uncertainty Law.
9. Brain: Dualism of Consciousness.
10. Practice: Parapsychology. Meditation.
===.

Questions.
1.
Can Vacuum ( Vacuum: T=0K, E= ∞ , p= 0, t=∞ )
be fundament / basis for the Universe as a whole?
2.
Can virtual / ideal / potential particles with such parameters as
: C/D=pi=3,14, R/N=k, E/M=c^2, h=0, c=0, i^2=-1, e^i(pi)- -1.
exist in the Vacuum ( Vacuum: T=0K, E= ∞ , p= 0, t=∞ )
3.
How can the virtual / ideal / potential particles begin to be ative ?
4.
Can Photon have such parameters: h=1, c=1, h=E/t, h=kb.?
5.
etc . . . . etc . . . etc
===,

Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus
==========================

[Dimebag]

Sciense is a religion by itself.
Why?
Becouse the God can create and govern the Universe
only using physical laws, formulas, equations.
Here is the scheme of His plan.
=.
God : Ten Scientific Commandments.
1. Vacuum: T=0K, E= ∞ , p= 0, t=∞ .
2. Particles: C/D=pi=3,14, R/N=k, E/M=c^2, h=0, c=0, i^2=-1, e^i(pi)= -1.
3. Photon: h=1, c=1, h=E/t, h=kb.
4. Electron: h*=h/2pi, E=h*f , e^2=ach* .
5. Gravity, Star formation: h*f = kTlogW : HeII -- > HeI -- > H -- > . . .
6. Proton: (p).
7. The evolution of interaction between Photon/Electron and Proton:
a) electromagnetic,
b) nuclear,
c) biological.
8. The Physical Laws:
a) Law of Conservation and Transformation Energy/ Mass,
b) Pauli Exclusion Law,
c) Heisenberg Uncertainty Law.
9. Brain: Dualism of Consciousness.
10. Practice: Parapsychology. Meditation.
===.

Questions.
1.
Can Vacuum ( Vacuum: T=0K, E= ∞ , p= 0, t=∞ )
be fundament / basis for the Universe as a whole?
2.
Can virtual / ideal / potential particles with such parameters as
: C/D=pi=3,14, R/N=k, E/M=c^2, h=0, c=0, i^2=-1, e^i(pi)- -1.
exist in the Vacuum ( Vacuum: T=0K, E= ∞ , p= 0, t=∞ )
3.
How can the virtual / ideal / potential particles begin to be ative ?
4.
Can Photon have such parameters: h=1, c=1, h=E/t, h=kb.?
5.
etc . . . . etc . . . etc
===,

Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus
==========================

I waited 3 days for that? I'm off to find a more worthwhile topic where I might find someone who replies directly to a question.

[Impenitent]

except for the faith in the belief that the future will resemble the past...

-Imp

Not sure exactly what you mean by this. We all know the universe changes with time, therefore the future is likely not to resemble the past, just look at images of early galaxies compared to more recent ones. This requires no faith, only the curiosity of mind to explore the evidence.

I realise maybe you re referring to prediction. In this case, many explanations we have are ways of predicting trends in data, therefore we can determine roughly the direction that such an observation is trending and extrapolate based on the future with a level of accuracy.

The key is to understand what a certain result really means. If you think scientists know the future, you are mistaken.

uniformitarianism is an assumption - it is taken on faith

-Imp

[Dimebag]

except for the faith in the belief that the future will resemble the past...

-Imp

Not sure exactly what you mean by this. We all know the universe changes with time, therefore the future is likely not to resemble the past, just look at images of early galaxies compared to more recent ones. This requires no faith, only the curiosity of mind to explore the evidence.

I realise maybe you re referring to prediction. In this case, many explanations we have are ways of predicting trends in data, therefore we can determine roughly the direction that such an observation is trending and extrapolate based on the future with a level of accuracy.

The key is to understand what a certain result really means. If you think scientists know the future, you are mistaken.

uniformitarianism is an assumption - it is taken on faith

-Imp

Sure, science is not a wholly self contained system, there are some key assumptions involved. These assumptions are formed through a general consensus and form the axioms upon which the scientific method is founded. But these assumptions are informed from real world observations. For instance, based on observations of early galaxies, cosmologists have been able to determine that the masses of particles must have remained the same since the formation of the earliest known galaxies. This would be a case for uniformitarianism.

Religion takes articles of faith, such as god's existence, and asserts that they should be taken without question, without any supporting foundation, and builds itself around these unsupported key assumptions.

[socratus]

Questions.
1.
Can Vacuum ( Vacuum: T=0K, E= ∞ , p= 0, t=∞ )
be fundament / basis for the Universe as a whole?
2.
Can virtual / ideal / potential particles with such parameters as
: C/D=pi=3,14, R/N=k, E/M=c^2, h=0, c=0, i^2=-1, e^i(pi)= -1.
exist in the Vacuum ( Vacuum: T=0K, E= ∞ , p= 0, t=∞ )
3.
How can the virtual / ideal / potential particles begin to be ative particles ?
4.
Can Photon have such parameters: h=1, c=1, h=E/t, h=kb.?
5.
Why electron doesn't have only one (1) formula,
why electron need to have six (6) formulas ?

etc . . . . etc . . . etc . . .

Where is God and His Souls in these formulas ?
Is Science a Religion by itself ?
===,

Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus
==========================

[Dimebag]

Questions.
1.
Can Vacuum ( Vacuum: T=0K, E= ∞ , p= 0, t=∞ )
be fundament / basis for the Universe as a whole?
2.
Can virtual / ideal / potential particles with such parameters as
: C/D=pi=3,14, R/N=k, E/M=c^2, h=0, c=0, i^2=-1, e^i(pi)= -1.
exist in the Vacuum ( Vacuum: T=0K, E= ∞ , p= 0, t=∞ )
3.
How can the virtual / ideal / potential particles begin to be ative particles ?
4.
Can Photon have such parameters: h=1, c=1, h=E/t, h=kb.?
5.
Why electron doesn't have only one (1) formula,
why electron need to have six (6) formulas ?

etc . . . . etc . . . etc . . .

Where is God and His Souls in these formulas ?
Is Science a Religion by itself ?
===,

Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus
==========================

As far as why do we resort to so many formulae to describe a single thing? I would imagine it is to do with, both our imperfect form of communication of concepts, I.e. a restrictive numerical and logic system called mathematics, and the fact that those formulae aren't handed down from the gods, as some pure extraction of the concepts which drive the universe. They are devised by finite minds which operate in a finite range, and therefore our explanations will be limited by the finiteness of the system we use to describe the universe with.

Now as far as where is god in these formulae, I would say to that, physics seeks to describe that which we can know. As we can never know god, or even know if there is a god, there is no way any description of the universe could ever contain a description of such a concept as god. The closest we CAN get to describing something "like" our IDEA of god, is describing the creation of the universe.

As far as souls, I think when science starts taking seriously the study of consciousness, you might be able to focus on that and might not require the concept of the soul.

[socratus]

Situation.
Please, look at 10 points again.
At first I speak about Vacuum, Photon, Electron by formulas .

Today we don't know what Vacuum, Photon, Electron are.
Therefore is possible many speculations speaking about them.
Take my work as one more speculation and try to understand
what Vacuum, Photon, Electron are.

Forget about God Souls and Religion.
I don't speak about God and Souls in any of my points.

But I say The God and His Souls are hidden in these formulas.
===

If I, a simple peasant , understood the scheme of God's plan of existence,
so everybody ,using usual human logic, can understand too.

socratus.
===

[Dimebag]

Situation.
Please, look at 10 points again.
At first I speak about Vacuum, Photon, Electron by formulas .

Today we don't know what Vacuum, Photon, Electron are.
Therefore is possible many speculations speaking about them.
Take my work as one more speculation and try to understand
what Vacuum, Photon, Electron are.

Forget about God Souls and Religion.
I don't speak about God and Souls in any of my points.

But I say The God and His Souls are hidden in these formulas.
===

If I, a simple peasant , understood the scheme of God's plan of existence,
so everybody ,using usual human logic, can understand too.

socratus.
===

I personally think that by focusing on the amazing universe we live in, a person can gain a very deep appreciation for the immensity, the vastness, and the sheer luck of being able to ponder such things. That is a consolation in itself, and is as good as any religion or way of being. The universe reveals its secrets to us, we don't need to delude ourselves, we just have to be able to observe and apprehend.

For some, that is more than any god could ever give.

[socratus]

Questions.
1. Can Vacuum ( Vacuum: T=0K, E= ∞ , p= 0, t=∞ )
be fundament / basis for the Universe as a whole?
2. Can virtual / ideal / potential particles with such parameters as
: C/D=pi=3,14, R/N=k, E/M=c^2, h=0, c=0, i^2=-1, e^i(pi)= -1.
exist in the Vacuum ( Vacuum: T=0K, E= ∞ , p= 0, t=∞ )
3. What is reason their movement ?
4. What is a Photon ?
5. What is an Electron ?
6. Where does consciousness come from ?
7. Is this consciousness staty or can develop ?
8. Who am I ?
==.
The answers to these questions must be given using physical laws and formulas.
Philosophy without physical laws and formulas is a market's talk.
And we can see the market's talk on many forums.
=.
socratus

==.

[Arising_uk]

Socratus,

Since you've been here I've asked you this a few times so maybe you'll do something this time. Could you please post a key explaining what all the constants and variables refer to in your posts. Some of us are not physicists.

[Ginkgo]

Socratus,

Since you've been here I've asked you this a few times so maybe you'll do something this time. Could you please post a key explaining what all the constants and variables refer to in your posts. Some of us are not physicists.

Having read all of his posts I am guessing three possibilities.

(a) The mathematics is the reality.

(b) The mathematics is a representation of the reality.

(c) Reductionism in science will eventually give you a first cause.

Other than that we would have to wait for a reply.