interested in the atheist perspective
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-11-2014, 03:48 AM
interested in the atheist perspective
So I have a few questions rumbling around, and if any of you feel obliged i'm interested in your input. These questions are all over the place, but hell you guys talk about a lot and i assume that means you think about a lot.. Perhaps your perspective on concepts/ideas will help me!

I'm not sure what exactly is meant to be implied when one claims to be an atheist?

What is your response to vacuum energy and the argument for a fine tuner?

--These next few are more so science/math questions.--

Two objects in an otherwise empty space move away from each other. They move at the velocity of .5C along the same line, but in opposite directions. Both are equipped with an atomic clock.. How does time work in this situation?


With math we often use equations to express evolving systems over some time period. We label time as an independent variable, and the output of the system a dependent variable.. Could it be possible that in reality we have an evolving time over some system period? Would we be able to discern a difference?

- I might not have explained this in a way that makes sense. I'll try to give an example to be more clear. Take a simple position equation with respect to time

Y=vt

instead of position of said system being determined by time evolution.. Could it be time that is being determined by some position evolution? I guess my thoughts on this are despite time/change-in-time things have a position, and it has an actual meaning, but when there is not position change time in essence has no meaning. I don't know.. crazy.. stupid.. or both i guess.
----

Mod I'm sorry if this is in the wrong place!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2014, 04:07 AM
RE: interested in the atheist perspective
(26-11-2014 03:48 AM)Switz5678 Wrote:  I'm not sure what exactly is meant to be implied when one claims to be an atheist?

Atheism is the lack of belief in god(s). That's pretty much it.

(26-11-2014 03:48 AM)Switz5678 Wrote:  What is your response to vacuum energy and the argument for a fine tuner?

The first one is a scientific question and is not strictly related to atheism. But maybe you're referring to particles that pop into existence and disappear the same way in a very short time. If I'm not mistaken, this is a matter that is still being investigated.

The fine tuner argument is a weak argument. The universe is not fine-tuned, on the contrary, it's very hostile to life and pretty much fatal to us in any way conceivable. No air, direct sunlight (thank you atmosphere), lack of sunlight (grab a warm coat), black holes, comets, star clusters (very unstable systems). And not just the universe, even on Earth many things are going to kill you: tsunamis, earthquakes, animals, and so on. Everything seems to want to kill us off, that is not really what I would call fine-tuned for life. Tongue

孤独 - The Out Crowd
Life is a flash of light between two eternities of darkness.
[Image: Schermata%202014-10-24%20alle%2012.39.01.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like The Polyglot Atheist's post
26-11-2014, 04:30 AM
RE: interested in the atheist perspective
I can't really improve on TPA's answer.

Only the first part relates to atheism and the other bits to mathematics / physics.

Atheist, physicist and mathematician are very different both semantically and syntactically.

So to answer the first part... what can be implied (deduced?) when one claims to be an atheist?

I depends where you claim it.

It can be implied that one is stating the desire to be laughed at, ridiculed or punched or even beheaded depending on which bar, church, state or country one is claiming it.

It could imply that one is up for a debate. It could imply that one is self-identifying oneself as rational / skeptical / secular / whatever when in the company of philosophers.

It could imply that one enjoys stating the obvious when in the company of scientists.

It could imply that one is claiming it to ward off lower life-forms when claiming it on a dating site (like TTA).

Thumbsup

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DLJ's post
26-11-2014, 04:52 AM
RE: interested in the atheist perspective
It could imply that one is claiming it to ward off lower life-forms when claiming it on a dating site (like TTA).

TTA is a dating site? I better clear my browser history before my wife finds out where I've been.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like dcobranchi's post
26-11-2014, 04:58 AM
RE: interested in the atheist perspective
One thing I would like to point out, that these scientific questions you have, are all being/will be solved. Science has brought us this far, and it will continue to do so, Religion hasnt contributed anything that explains the inner workings of atoms, and just because we dont know YET, doesn't mean we should attribute it to god, thats exactly what Cave men did. For anyone who may be interested, there is a book called "The Source" by James A. Mitchener, it tells the story of the jewish people and religion from its origins to its end, starting thousands of years ago when man was trying to explain why the sun set, why it rains, what lightning is etc etc. Its worth the read
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2014, 05:08 AM
RE: interested in the atheist perspective
(26-11-2014 03:48 AM)Switz5678 Wrote:  So I have a few questions rumbling around, and if any of you feel obliged i'm interested in your input. These questions are all over the place, but hell you guys talk about a lot and i assume that means you think about a lot.. Perhaps your perspective on concepts/ideas will help me!

I'm not sure what exactly is meant to be implied when one claims to be an atheist?

What is your response to vacuum energy and the argument for a fine tuner?

--These next few are more so science/math questions.--

Two objects in an otherwise empty space move away from each other. They move at the velocity of .5C along the same line, but in opposite directions. Both are equipped with an atomic clock.. How does time work in this situation?


With math we often use equations to express evolving systems over some time period. We label time as an independent variable, and the output of the system a dependent variable.. Could it be possible that in reality we have an evolving time over some system period? Would we be able to discern a difference?

- I might not have explained this in a way that makes sense. I'll try to give an example to be more clear. Take a simple position equation with respect to time

Y=vt

instead of position of said system being determined by time evolution.. Could it be time that is being determined by some position evolution? I guess my thoughts on this are despite time/change-in-time things have a position, and it has an actual meaning, but when there is not position change time in essence has no meaning. I don't know.. crazy.. stupid.. or both i guess.
----

Mod I'm sorry if this is in the wrong place!

Atheists don't believe in any gods.

The rest has nothing to do with atheism.

There must be a nest of theists someplace trying to come up with ways to discredit science in order to convert us heathens.

Too bad science is not the foundation of atheism in any way. Not believing in any gods is a simple concept. Atheists are not by necessity scientists.

Science is just a method used to learn new things. It has nothing to do with gods or atheists.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Dom's post
26-11-2014, 07:34 AM
RE: interested in the atheist perspective
(26-11-2014 03:48 AM)Switz5678 Wrote:  I'm not sure what exactly is meant to be implied when one claims to be an atheist?

In the strictest sense of the word, it means not believing in any gods. Now, on top of that, individuals often use the word differently, and there is a lot of baggage frequently added to the word by theists.

Note that being an atheist doesn't strictly mean believing there are no gods; it can also include simply lacking a belief (typically based on a lack of evidence). The idea of believing there are no gods is called strong or gnostic atheism, while simply lacking the belief is weak or agnostic atheism.

I consider myself an agnostic atheist. I'm open to the idea of gods, but I'd like to see some evidence for their existence.


(26-11-2014 03:48 AM)Switz5678 Wrote:  What is your response to vacuum energy...

I don't know much about this.


(26-11-2014 03:48 AM)Switz5678 Wrote:  ...and the argument for a fine tuner?

It's basically putting the cart before the horse. They look at all the crazy variables that have to be just right (and there are a lot) and then declare that this is too big of a coincidence to have happened randomly.

The problem with this can be seen by looking at the sheer number of planets that exist. The vast majority of them are not "tuned" for life, as we know it. Even on the ones that do seem "Earth-like", we have still yet to find life. So, to look the other direction at the argument, we have a huge collection of planets that weren't fine-tuned. The notion that at least one would have all the right variables set just right and that life would have started can be seen via the concept of iterative probability.

The idea here is if you take a small, but non-zero chance, and you check that over and over, the chance that you will get at least one success increases. The best example of this to see day-to-day is something like the lottery. The chance that any individual will win is pretty small, but the chance that someone will win, when iterated a few million times suddenly jumps up to something actually plausible. So, the chance that Planet X will be "fine tuned" is crazy small, but the chance that at least one planet will be fine tuned when looking at all of the planets that exist suddenly jumps up.


And, at the end of the day we do exist, so trying to look backward and calculate the chance is kind of odd. I mean, if Joe wins the lottery, does it make any sense to say "Well, Joe, your chances of winning were 1/250,000,000, so you must have cheated."? No, it ignores the other several million people that played and lost.


(26-11-2014 03:48 AM)Switz5678 Wrote:  --These next few are more so science/math questions.--

I'll save these for someone who knows what they're talking about. My knowledge of relativity is very small, and I was taught it about 17 years ago.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like RobbyPants's post
26-11-2014, 08:08 AM (This post was last modified: 26-11-2014 08:18 AM by Full Circle.)
RE: interested in the atheist perspective
Fine tuner Consider

I believe you should always use one if you are serious about playing any string instrument.

[Image: post-29980-1281981263.gif]

Cause and effect seem to give people lots of trouble. For instance the Egyptians considered the Nile crocodile a god because they “brought” with them the floods to water their crop fields. For some reason it didn’t occur to them that the rising waters is what brought the crocs in the first place. Facepalm

When creationists say that if our planet wasn’t exactly 93 million miles from the sun, had a mix of 20.9% oxygen in the air we breathe etc. etc. the human species would have gone extinct or it never would have existed in the first place - same mistake the Egyptians made with the crocodiles, putting the “croc” before the cart so to speak Laugh out load

The human species evolved to survive in this environment and not the other way around. The environment did not evolve to fit the human species. Comprende amigo?

Easy peasy nice and easy.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like Full Circle's post
26-11-2014, 08:27 AM (This post was last modified: 26-11-2014 11:41 AM by houseofcantor.)
RE: interested in the atheist perspective
(26-11-2014 03:48 AM)Switz5678 Wrote:  Two objects in an otherwise empty space move away from each other. They move at the velocity of .5C along the same line, but in opposite directions. Both are equipped with an atomic clock.. How does time work in this situation?

Moving clocks run slow It seems you're assuming absolute time which is so last-last century. Big Grin

My response to vaccuum energy, I'm not sure what you mean, supposedly it's smaller than predicted.

My response to fine tuner arguments, bullocks. I don't see where people who use that argument for a creator are not pulling probability assessments outta their ass. Maybe if we were nebulous creatures of plasma floating in the interstellar void, the argument might have merit.

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like houseofcantor's post
26-11-2014, 09:04 AM
RE: interested in the atheist perspective
(26-11-2014 08:27 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(26-11-2014 03:48 AM)Switz5678 Wrote:  Two objects in an otherwise empty space move away from each other. They move at the velocity of .5C along the same line, but in opposite directions. Both are equipped with an atomic clock.. How does time work in this situation?

Moving clocks run slow It seems you're assuming absolute time which is so last-last century. Big Grin

My response to vaccuum energy, I'm not sure what you mean, supposedly it's smaller than predicted.

My response to fine tuner arguments, bullocks. I don't see where people who use that argument for a creator are not pulling probability assessments outta their ass. Maybe if were nebulous creatures of plasma floating in the interstellar void, the argument might have merit.

Relativity : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_relativity

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: