Anti-science madness |
Post Reply | Page <12345 13> |
Author | |||
AhmadJoyia
Senior Member Joined: 20 March 2005 Status: Offline Points: 1647 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
If I throw some light on what bro Abu is trying to say here about science, though I don't subscribe his opinions, when I came across a document where it is admitted that Quantum Mechanics is unique in the intellectual history of the world, because (i)It has no known limits to its validity (ii)Fundamentally, we do not understand it at all! . Interestingly, he posted a philosophical problem in the very end that just want to share here as Some have thrown up their hands and said that Plato got it right all along--that when it comes to understanding physical reality-- we are all in the cave...
Ok, while the 2nd observation is self-explanatory, however, is there anyone who can explain us about the 1st observation? Here is the link, in case someone needs it. Is this, any longer, good enough? Edited by AhmadJoyia - 24 January 2016 at 1:49am |
|||
Tim the plumber
Senior Member Male Joined: 30 September 2014 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 944 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Having done physics to the point where my maths ability gave out. And I droped out of university. I might be one of the best people to act as a guide to all this in that I know with an extremely high confidence that I do not know very much about it but can see the basics of it and it's very weird. This is my basic guide; Isaac Newton started physics. Newtonian physics is very straight forward. It's how we work out where an artillery shell will land and all the rest of engineering. All aircraft and power stations are done using just this simple (well simple-ish) model of the universe. Then along comes stuff smaller than the atom; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVxBdMxgVX0 Decent video. Fun to watch although don't expect manny holywood killings. Other probelms with the basic physics of Newton kept poping up like the orbit of Mercury being wrong. Einstein comes along and explains that whilst the laws of Newton are right, acceleration is proportional to mass and force on that mass, acceleration is a function of time. It turns out that time is not constant. To me this is a mindblowing idea. Have a look at the video. If you have not watched several such things and thought about them before you will not get most of it but when you have watched lots of them and generally talked to people about it all some of it starts to be understandable-ish. It's still all very weird. Have fun. Come back and talk about it all. Thanks for inserting some other Islamic voice that is not mad. |
|||
Abu Loren
Senior Member Joined: 29 June 2012 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 1646 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
You are absolutely right. A Hindu or a Budhist or a Christiand can say the same thing. But how dow I know my religion is the right one? Well I know in my heart of hearts that Allah Subhana Wa Ta'ala made the heavens and the earth, then created Adam (Alayhi Salaam) and there was only ONE religion. Then when people began to disobey Allah Subhana Wa Ta'ala in His Infinite Merrcy sent Prophets and Messengers and books to teach men and to put them back the Straight Path. Some will believe, others will not. How do I know this? God told me.
110% I know this to be true? How? I read His books, have you? |
|||
La Ilaha IllAllah
|
|||
Matt Browne
Senior Member Male Joined: 19 April 2010 Location: Germany Status: Offline Points: 937 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
It's not just a British habit. It's one of the key elements of Western thinking, which liberal Muslims have adopted as well. Almost all Muslims posting on Islamicity have a conservative or even non-violent fundamentalist view of Islam. The reason for the Islamic Golden Age was liberal Muslims dominating over conservative Muslims. Self criticism was encouraged at the time. Alhazen promoted the scientific method. In 1250 CE this ended with fundamentalist Muslims taking control. To this day liberal Islam has never recovered from this blow. Since 1979 the situation has gotten even worse. Abu Loren and others are victims of Saudi Wahhabist propaganda flooding the entire planet. Edited by Matt Browne - 24 January 2016 at 7:10am |
|||
A religion that's intolerant of other religions can't be the world's best religion --Abdel Samad
Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people--Eleanor Roosevelt |
|||
Tim the plumber
Senior Member Male Joined: 30 September 2014 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 944 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Have you read the other religious books? Have you read any science books? Even better have you looked through a telescope? |
|||
Emettman
Senior Member Male Joined: 02 December 2014 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 144 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
That seems pretty fair. "Phlogiston theory" actually works, for a very limited range of circumstances. Newtonian mechanics works very well, within a framework limited by size and speed. (Go too small or too fast, and the shortcomings appear.) As far as is yet known there are no "limitation clauses" which affect quantum phenomena.
Yes, the problem of obtaining *direct* measurements and *direct* observations is still valid, but there is this big difference. We in many cases *can make the shadows move as we direct.* What things actually are when I pick up a pen, or cause two things to stick together due to static electricity, those mysteries we have not plumbed, not right to the bottom. But our low-level or approximate knowledge is good enough to make the cave's shadows dance to our tune, which strongly suggests that our partial knowledge is on the right track on the way to perfect knowledge, if that can ever be attained. Understanding? That may be impossible, even if we do succeed in working with what we don't understand. As young child I had true knowledge that if a certain button was pressed on a torch, light would appear. More I did not know, then. The difference between true but only working knowledge, and deeper understanding. Later I learned about batteries. Later I learned about the chemistry of (some!) batteries. Later I learned a bit about hoe atomic structure makes chemistry work... But what is atomic structure? Still levels of understanding to go before "I understand" is full, and we haven't hit bottom yet. And this far removed from day-to-day commonsense experience (at the human scale) analogies and picture-language really starts to fail. The good language left is mathematics, and almost that alone, and this starts to go deeper than I can follow. That doesn't mean I don't understand how to use a torch. Edited by Emettman - 24 January 2016 at 10:14am |
|||
Emettman
Senior Member Male Joined: 02 December 2014 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 144 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
For 100% (or 110%) that is not good enough, though to the person in that position (Hindu, Buddhist, Christina, Muslim, it will seem that it is... ) Why is it not good enough, because any can hold it, of any content? You speak eloquently of your conviction. And the *conviction* I do not doubt. But that does not objectively settle the question of truth, or every utterly convinced believer who ever lived, died of blew themselves up would have been right about what they believed *whatever* that was. This doesn't work. (except to produce clashes between different convinced believers.)
So you believe. Does belief equate to certain truth? You would, I think, deny that for any other faith, so you are privileging your own faith and your own judgement. That's tempting, and rather natural, but the question is, why do you rate yourself as special?
Yes, enough to know I should not be Hindu, Muslim or Buddhist. To the best of my knowledge and experience. But that has to fall short of 100% certainty. *Whatever* it may *feel* like. But that takes some disciplined dispassionate distancing from one's own perspective to realise. It's not easy. Edited by Emettman - 26 January 2016 at 6:07am |
|||
AhmadJoyia
Senior Member Joined: 20 March 2005 Status: Offline Points: 1647 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
An article that may find your interest where the author concludes ...Thus it seems Einstein was doubly wrong when he said, God does not play dice. Not only does God definitely play dice, but He sometimes confuses us by throwing them where they can't be seen.... |
|||
Post Reply | Page <12345 13> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |