After observing the direction Physics is taking, I am becoming
more and more convinced that Physics is the coming religion in the
west.

If one examines various religions, especially Christianity it is
amazing how similar they are. In fact I would go as far as to suggest
that, given the present trends, in another 2000 years from now, Physics
will be on the same level in the west as Christianity is today. In the
year 4000 Christianity will have just about died out in the face of
more and more scientific advances, all of which continue to erode the
idea of a God system of belief. Replacing it with a religion based on
science, with Physics at its heart. It will offer solace to the average
man by explaining WHY he is here and MOST of the mysteries of life in
general. I say MOST as not only will science still have a lot to
discover, even then, but a little mystery adds spice to any religion. I
have listed some examples of their similarity below no doubt you could
add others:-


Both have a something from nothing type of instant universe creation,
the big bang on the one hand and 6 days on the other.


Both claim that the universe was created from forces beyond our
understanding, yet, forces that we will eventually understand.


Both enshrine their ideas of the forces involved in creation, in books
that are in the most part ambiguous to the average reader, requiring
interpretation from scientists/priests.


Both have experts in their field scientists on the one hand, priests on
the other, both preaching from privileged positions, their
interpretation of the word to the inferior masses below them.


Both have special buildings dedicated to their field of worship,
churches and labs.


Both have prophets who came before the master to preach the word and
prepare the way, Aryabhata, Dignaga, Dharmakirti, Alhazen, Sir Isaac
Newton, etc. for Physics and Yehoshua, Shmu'el, Isaiah, Moses etc for
the Christians.


Both had a messiah, a saviour or liberator to show them a new way Jesus
for the Christians and Einstein for the Physicists.


Both have an old and new verification of their greatness, in physics
old Mechanics, & new Relativistic mechanics & Quantum mechanics.
Christianity has the old testament and new testament. Plus many other
similar old and new writings in both fields all reinforcing each other.


Both have their commandments, in the case of Christianity the 12 off we
all know, I hope, and in Physics some of the most significant are
Conservation : Boyle's :Special Relativity : General Relativity :
Inertia : Heat Conduction : Gravitation: Coulomb's : Ohm's :
Kirchhoff's : Gauss's : Faraday's and Ampere's. Many others include
those in Quantum Mechanics etc but I will settle with these 12 for now
just to maintain a balance.


Both claim to predict the future using selected writings and the
reasoning
of their respective prophets to justify their claims.


Enough is enough, judge for yourself.

Views: 785

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

No, but the fact that a self-avowed skeptic can't even grasp basic logic sure bothers me. How he came to I am glad you know there [w]as something there before when I just wrote Saying "we don't know" is not equivalent to "there was nothing before" is beyond me. That's not even a logical fallacy, that's pure disingenuousness. He does his best to look like a lunatic, but my best guess is he's just a troll.
I don't try and look like a lunatic, that's the real me. Disagreeable, frustrating, stupid, argumentative, perhaps, but troll, I don't think so, but perhaps I am if the definition of troll means saying things you don't agree with.

Please advise, I am new to this site, was I just supposed to jump in and agree with everyone, is that what you do here sit around and agree with each other?

If you want me to go, no problem, just tell me to stop disagreeing with you or leave and I'm gone.
the definition of troll means saying things you don't agree with

Obviously not. Once again you dismiss the evidence (emphasized with bold characters just above, but apparently that wasn't still enough for you to notice) and jump to an unfounded conclusion. I'd happily retract my judgment when you stop putting your own words in other people's mouths, but your last reply leaves me with very little hope it'll happen soon.
Don't give up on me, I will try harder.
Fine. What am I supposed to reply now?
Nothing, move on, no doubt I will make another equally stupid statement about science or scientists which you can address accordingly. Perhaps this will do:-

"There is a great directing head of people and things — a Supreme Being who looks after the destinies of the world.
I am convinced that the body is made up of entities that are intelligent and are directed by this Higher Power. When one cuts his finger, I believe it is the intelligence of these entities which heals the wound. When one is sick, it is the intelligence of these entities which brings convalescence. You know that there are living cells in the body so tiny that the microscope cannot find them at all. The entities that give life and soul to the human body are finer still and lie infinitely beyond the reach of our finest scientific instruments. When these entities leave the body, the body is like a ship without a rudder — deserted, motionless and dead.

* Thomas Edison. As quoted in The Romance and Drama of the Rubber Industry (1936) by Harvey Samuel Firestone"

But then he did say "We don't know a millionth of one percent about anything" which shows he had lucid days.
Only as expected, I offered the same argument years ago on A Vs C with exactly the same results. Its amazing how predictable humans can be. It touches some sort of nerve in some atheists, check out the venom and quantity of replies and tell me I'm wrong. It always surprises me however how some so quickly resort to personal abuse as a result of a simple question.
Don't play innocent, Mr. Stewart. Your "simple question" was clearly meant to provoke precisely this reaction. In fact, it would seem you admit to predicting as much.
I don't claim to be innocent of anything, it was certainly meant to provoke a reaction, I am sorry if I woke anyone up. I think this particular question has run its course, so I am not going to bother responding to the arguments any further. Its a stupid premise anyway, so if you wish, you can go back to sleep for a while.

I have already said I am happy to move on if you so wish, but I will tell you this, I have been a strong Atheist, for want of a better term, one incidentally I disagree with, but that's another argument, for over 50 years, and I "know" God does not exist, so please don't try and teach me how to be an Atheist.
I won't deign to teach you how to be an atheist or anything else, but it behooves you to learn how to be a scientist (and by that I mean somebody who understands and embraces the scientific method as the way to understand our universe) and more important, how to respect those you would converse with by being intellectually honest.

Thank you for your concern that I might be a somnambulist, but I am quite awake enough to see that your arguments insult my intelligence. On the face of it, the only way for a science to become a religion is by ceasing to be a science. The insulting nonsense of your argument is perfectly encapsulated in the thread title.
I have no desire to learn to be a scientist or priest, I an to stupid, anyway I prefer being ignorant, but I never lie. Clearly my existence insults some, its a good job we are living in a more enlightened age or I would need asbestos underwear.
If you prefer to be ignorant, why are you posting questions in a forum? Hey, you know who else prefers being ignorant while appearing to seek knowledge? Fundies!

Of course, I assume you're joking about that, since you follow it with the obviously ironic assertion that you never lie.

RSS

line

Update Your Membership :

Membership

line

line

Nexus on Social Media:

line

© 2017   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service