Posted on 06/20/2016 6:11:57 AM PDT by xzins
Has anybody ever explained where all the “stuff” came from to make/cause the big bang possible?
I’ve read Kaku’s books for years. He’s finally gaining the wisdom of the ages!
I don’t wonder about His actions, but sometimes His intentions worry me.
Oh professor that won’t sit well with the left....good thing you are correct
...and it’s hard. Which is why at least one college wants to remove math from the curriculum and replace it with diversity / sensitivity training or some other liberal clap trap.
It’s vitro resist because so much of science is filled with leftists.
Katy is amazing. His ability to explain very complex physics to the average Joe is most excellent. His multidimensional universe theories have been intriguing and challenging. String theory may or may not be true. Kaku’s continuing exploration of them is equivalent to Feynmann’s quantum electrical theory was in terms of impact on modern physics. He has written several good books for the layman. Well worth the read
Not true
But would you bang Penny ?
Michio Kaku is obviously just a crazy fundamentalist fanatic who doesn’t understand science.
“Sorry, Dr. Kaku, but “theoretical” particles are not “physical evidence”. Measure a tachyon, and get back to us...”
Concepts defining imperceivable aspects of a greater than our limited 4D reality do not need hard repeatable evidence in describing the ‘math’ of conforming equations.
Dr. Kaku has a wonderful way of making multi-verse descriptions that our little brains have a hard time getting around. To imagine a reality that is greater than 4D, the X,Y,Z & time, only our mathematics can provide the empirical solution(s), but the beauty is in the theory.
I can’t give insight there but want to add to your question. There was a microbiologist that said there’s no way the first dna was randomly programed. Yet another has said evolution is limited to the dna programming the life form carries. Anyone remember names or have links please throw them out here.
The key difference between physics and math is that the former requires a tie to reality while the latter does not.
By letting mathematicians take over physics, it has brought us to a realm of mysticism where mathematical constructs with unproven existence (e.g. black holes) are treated as facts.
Michu, Tyson, Nye - these are examples of the modern breed of celebrity-”scientist” that the field needs to resort to for lack of any continued relevance of their studies to the real world.
Laz, be honest. You CAUSED the bang!
Hegel’s God
EXCERPT:
There is one major modern philosopher who deals extensively with the issue of God and who should have been taken into account in these recent discussions, but hasn’t been. This is Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831).
It’s well known that various liberal theologians during the last century and a half have wanted to produce a conception of God that could satisfy people’s spiritual longings without conflicting with Darwinian evolution and other well-established scientific discoveries. What’s not well known is that Hegel already did this, with remarkable power and subtlety, in response to the great modern skeptics, Hume and Kant.
Hegel’s philosophy is difficult to access because of his intricate manner of writing, and because of various misleading rumors that have become attached to his name. Karl Marx claimed that Hegel was an important influence on Marx’s own thinking, and since Marx was an atheist, many believers have wanted nothing to do with his supposed teacher, Hegel. On the other hand, S øren Kierkegaard made fun of Hegel for supposedly reducing faith to an arid and impenetrable rational ‘system’. So Hegel’s philosophical theology has been caught between the battle-lines of atheists who reject it or try to soft-pedal it and believers to whom its terminology is foreign and off-putting. As a result, there have been few commentators who’ve had enough sympathy for it to lay it out in a way that makes it seem attractive.
However, I think Hegel’s time should be now. Large numbers of people both within traditional religions and outside them are looking for non-dogmatic ways of thinking about transcendent reality. Writers like Karen Armstrong and Elaine Pagels speak to a large audience that’s less interested in tradition or dogma, as such, than in religious experience and religious thought. A readable account of Hegel will speak to this audience through the sheer illuminating power of his ideas.
What are these ideas? Hegel begins with a radical critique of conventional ways of thinking about God. God is commonly described as a being who is omniscient, omnipotent, and so forth. Hegel says this is already a mistake. If God is to be truly infinite, truly unlimited, then God cannot be ‘a being’, because ‘a being’, that is, one being (however powerful) among others, is already limited by its relations to the others. It’s limited by not being X, not being Y, and so forth. But then it’s clearly not unlimited, not infinite! To think of God as ‘a being’ is to render God finite.
But if God isn’t ‘a being’, what is God? Here Hegel makes two main points. The first is that there’s a sense in which finite things like you and me fail to be as real as we could be, because what we are depends to a large extent on our relations to other finite things. If there were something that depended only on itself to make it what it is, then that something would evidently be more fully itself than we are, and more fully real, as itself. This is why it’s important for God to be infinite: because this makes God more himself (herself, itself) and more fully real, as himself (herself, itself), than anything else is.
Hegel’s second main point is that this something that’s more fully real than we are isn’t just a hypothetical possibility, because we ourselves have the experience of being more fully real, as ourselves, at some times than we are at other times. We have this experience when we step back from our current desires and projects and ask ourselves, what would make the most sense, what would be best overall, in these circumstances? When we ask a question like this, we make ourselves less dependent on whatever it was that caused us to feel the desire or to have the project. We experience instead the possibility of being self-determining, through our thinking about what would be best. But something that can conceive of being self-determining in this way, seems already to be more ‘itself’, more real as itself, than something that’s simply a product of its circumstances.
Putting these two points together, Hegel arrives at a substitute for the conventional conception of God that he criticized. If there is a higher degree of reality that goes with being self-determining (and thus real as oneself), and if we ourselves do in fact achieve greater self-determination at some times than we achieve at other times, then it seems that we’re familiar in our own experience with some of the higher degree of reality that we associate with God. Perhaps we aren’t often aware of the highest degree of this reality, or the sum of all of this reality, which would be God himself (herself, etc.). But we are aware of some of it – as the way in which we ourselves seem to be more fully present, more fully real, when instead of just letting ourselves be driven by whatever desires we currently feel, we ask ourselves what would be best overall. We’re more fully real, in such a case, because we ourselves are playing a more active role, through thought, than we play when we simply let ourselves be driven by our current desires.
What is God, then? God is the fullest reality, achieved through the self-determination of everything that’s capable of any kind or degree of self-determination. Thus God emerges out of beings of limited reality, including ourselves.
(...)
I hope something else is evident from what I’ve outlined, as well as from the poets, mystics, and other philosophers I listed, and from the people you undoubtedly know who resonate with their writings. Religion that’s understood in Hegel’s way is a much more pervasive, much less dogmatic, and much more interesting phenomenon, intellectually, than what Richard Dawkins and his fellow critics identify as religion.
https://philosophynow.org/issues/86/Hegels_God
Hegel’s path is the path to hell.
I hit the universe.
There's one over there ...
OOPS! Gone.
Just so long as you didn't shoot the sheriff...
Francis Crick, I believe, discoverer of DNA, who could not rationalize the design of DNA with random events
who then suggested “panspermia” as an explanation of how the earth was seeded with a design that created life
so we were created by aliens, not by God
But never did explain who created intelligent aliens
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.