Gravity is only a theory ...

[greendoor]

I just found an interesting article ... I can't say I agree with everything, but it presents some very interesting questions to say the least ... worthy of some thought ...

http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p67.htm

A parody it may be. And Ellery_Schempp is a known activist with strange beliefs and a strange agenda. But good questions are good questions, even if they come from an utter nutter.

[smotgroup]

Hi greendoor.

do you know that many people on this planet don't even know the Earth has two moons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_second_moon

Jerry

[silverfox]

A very catchy title to this thread Greendoor, to which all that is missing is "...and so is everything else."

In the final anslysis it all boils down to "beliefs" and the various and sundry reasons people have for latching onto some while steering well clear of others.

Intentions and motivations that most of us scarcely give a second thought to in that selection process and generally for good reason. It is fear, ignorance, selfishness, and many other equally unflattering ones that all tend to come well before any of our better ones in how we actually acquire most of those beliefs as well as all the ones we'll subsequently attach to them along the way.

And of course people are always on the lookout for ways to justify, excuse, or more likely diguise and hide those intentions and motivations away rather than ever admit they not only have them but allow themselves to be controlled and directed by them for most of their lives.

What we've all wound-up with from the cumulative effect of that, which we've also wittingly or not had something of a hand in ourselves, is a highly fictionalized account of both ourselves and our world with all the facts suitably bent, distorted, or conveniently left out in order to accommodate that narrative.

[ovyyus]

Well said silverfox. Belief-hopping seems like such an inefficient way to learn about something that is uneffected by belief.

[greendoor]

Silverfox - very well put. I 'believe' I have a similar belief to yourself in this regard ... the universe is so complex, we just don't have the time & resources to prove every axiom for ourselves, so we are forced to choose a belief. We will be swayed by nature, nurture, peer pressure, everything else.

Ovyyus - i'm not sure that you agree with Silverfox at all ... I presume this is another swipe at (yawn) faith vs science. I presume you are suggesting that 'science' is uneffected (sic) by belief.

I am suggesting that science is completey affected by belief at all times, and if we break everything down to it's root axioms - these beliefs can often be questioned and found wanting.

Science is just a word for knowledge - and it seems a bit random to exclude arts & religion from Science, as I believe everything is ultimately a form of knowledge to someone. Popular science & popular religion are just looking at different aspects of life, for whatever reasons appeal sufficient numbers of people to make that subject popular.

Religious believers can be just as logical as scientists. Few people will quibble about whether 1 + 1 = 2. Cause & Effect is a huge part of religion & science. Questioning the unknown. Theorising - Testing - Learning. Religion IS a science.

And Science IS a religion - with fanatically held beliefs that are sometimes illogical and unreasonalbe and insufficiently tested.

BOTH science & religion are exploited by corrupt people for personal gain.

The belief that almighty 'Science' is somehow infallible and beyond question just seems daft to me.

1 Thessalonians 5:21 "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good"

It is useless to bring out mindless science vs religion arguments. For every example of bad religion, I can find equally bad examples of bad science. Religion has stuffed up and killed millions of innocent people. Science has stuffed up and killed millions of innocent people (think of guns & automobiles if you doubt that - but I consider much of modern medicine to be shamelessly exploitative bad science in the extreme).

If it wasn't for corrupt 'science', our world could be a utopia of free energy providing clean food, water, heat, light, transport for the poorest person in the world.

Just don't try to tell me that science is somehow intrinsicly more 'right' and immune from fallible human beliefs.

[Grimer]

"Few people will quibble about whether 1 + 1 = 2". I will - if you attempt to apply it to the real world cos in the real world there is always an interaction term to be considered.

But on the general theme of the unreliability of scientific assumptions I am all with you greendoor. The most intelligent experimental officer I ever had, Peter Warren, used to say that whenever he tackled a difficult problem he always went right back to the assumptions and he invariably found that they were wrong - that's what made the problem difficult.

I have always tried to follow Warren's good example.

[Grimer]

I only skipped through the article the first time and failed to realise it was an attack on creationists.

The author will get a nasty shock when the existing theory of gravity collapses under the weight of a gravitational mill. Maybe evolution will go the same way, not that I agree with the more wacky creationist arguments.

[ovyyus]

...I presume you are suggesting that 'science' is uneffected (sic) by belief.

Your presumption is incorrect. The physics of a bouncing ball appears unaffected by an observers belief. So, can we observe without belief?

I never mentioned science at all???

[greendoor]

Sorry - due to the contentious source of that article, Silverfox's generalising about beliefs and your comment about "belief hopping" I assumed you were trying to suggest that physics is all black & white, unlike beliefs.

Fair enough. A good example of the problems with basic assumptions.

At a quantum physics level, I guess there are those who would suggest that our beliefs can and do change reality - even the reality of a bouncing ball. Looked at closely, that ball is a small universe of it's own, teeming with galaxies of chaotic particles, all waiting to be influenced by some energy or force ... at some level it's probaby affected by what song your local DJ plays on the radio, as the radio waves are mixing and mingling with all the chaos inside that ball ...

Some would say our Creator knows exactly where each particle is, and the consequences of all possible actions & reactions, and could chose to influence this chaotic behaviour if He willed ... we assume that We can affect particles simply by observing them ...

Lotteries are still decided by bouncing balls ... they aren't that predictable ultimately ...

Or so I believe ...

[ovyyus]

At a quantum physics level, I guess there are those who would suggest that our beliefs can and do change reality - even the reality of a bouncing ball.

That may be true but it doesn't change the fact that we observe the physical world behaving in specific and often invariant ways that are independent of our belief.

[silverfox]

"Reality" exists primarily to substantiate our beliefs as much as possible, not to contradict them; and it is only restricted in that pursuit by the laws of physics, mathematics, and chemistry; none of which, I might add, are nearly as limited or immutable as we happen to "believe" they are, either.

The object of that "object lesson", if you will, is to show us what effects those beliefs, (or the concepts and ideas they are based on), physically have and and in turn create when they are propelled into reality by the various underlying intentions and motivations we ourselves apply to them.

It is not, and never has been a case of knowing or understanding those physical forms in and of themselves. We know quite well how they already appear to our senses.

Now using science and technology we can determine the dimensions of what any oil painting is. We can analyize the formulas for the paints that were used. We can also determine the likely age of both the canvas and paint or from the various textures that exist in it whatever tools were most likely used to paint it, and so on, and so forth.

In fact, we can determine with great degree of precision and certainty just about every last little physical detail there is to know about that particular picture except for the one and only thing that might make any of those efforts worthwile... which is quite simply why did the artist paint it, and what does it mean?

[Grimer]

Very good.

[iacob alex]

.....as you can see at :
http://teslaresearch.jimdo.com/dynamic- ... of-gravity
A theory is a possible explanation that has not yet been proved true...
Al_ex

[Art]

Great Article Alex

[Oystein]

Ovyyus wrote:

That may be true but it doesn't change the fact that we observe the physical world behaving in specific and often invariant ways that are independent of our belief.

I guess this is not completely true, and it is an important "obstacle" that we must know of. What we see (or hear or feel) is colored by what we are taught, and what we are taught is called knowledge, and knowledge can be a belief, but belief don't have to be knowledge, of course.

Like when people watched the original Besslerwheel turn, most people saw a fake wheel turning, while other saw a weight driven perpetual motion wheel. Many people could hear the cats running inside. Why could they hear the cats, if there where no cats? It had to be cats...because of what we know, and that is what we believe...

This is how knowledge and science etc. will put a color on your observations, either you like it or not.

Some people see a physical UFO, and a scientist see a weather phenomena, but they really saw the same thing...

Or like when scientists see light that is red-shifted, they say they see the object moving away from them. But do they? Or do they just see red-shifted light?

When Christians see miracles, most people see something else.

And what about the other senses? Like hearing?

When people watch Finsruds machine in real life, the see an ingenious machine that does something that is not explained by the parent "laws". But others see a fake PM machine with an electromagnetic relay. So these guys can even here the relay clicking, while others can't.

Why can they hear the clicking of a relay? Because we see and hear what we believe, and we believe what we are taught... It does not mean that it is true though..