Debate Mansion

   

If you believe in God, refute this! (Page 144)

Post Reply New Post

Page 144 of 149

K.Universe.

Goldie

K.Universe.

Joined: 02 September 2012

Posts: 1137

Posted: 06 November 2012 at 11:23pm | IP Logged
^^ No, that's fine! But if you are eliminating, I would like to see you eliminate them scientifically / mathematically, rather than by the cliched/tiresome "no proof"method.

For example, what is the probability of quantum fluctuations producing an insanely complex entity such as the human brain, when it takes extraordinarily high amounts of directed energy to produce one Higgs Boson that too for the tiniest of the tiny seconds, so fleeting as to be governed by Heisenberg's uncertainty principle  for its brief existence and for these fluctuations to remain stable enough to produce matter particles that somehow arrange themselves in patterns and can start contemplating about how they and the rest of the universe came to be?

In other words, I would like to see some heavy-duty science/math/logic when adopting / refuting a resolution :)

Dear Guest, Being an unregistered member you are missing out on participating in the lively discussions happening on the topic "If you believe in God, refute this! (Page 144)" in Debate Mansion forum. In addition you lose out on the fun interactions with fellow members and other member exclusive features that India-Forums has to offer. Join India's most popular discussion portal on Indian Entertainment. It's FREE and registration is effortless so JOIN NOW!

Vintage.Wine

Goldie

Vintage.Wine

Joined: 03 July 2012

Posts: 1152

Posted: 12 November 2012 at 12:38am | IP Logged


  Okay let's resort to the Math to see if we can garner any clues from that ..

cos(x) + i*sin(x) = (e^(i*x) + e^-(i*x))/2 + i*(e^(i*x) - e^-(i*x))/(2i) = (2*e^(i*x))/2 = e^(pi*x)  

 ^^^  We know that 
cos(x) = (e^(i*x) + e^-(i*x))/2  AND  sin(x) = (e^(i*x) - e^-(i*x))/(2i) 
              

                                                                         Which means 

e^(i*x) = cos(x) + i*sin(x),   ...Now as we  replace X with Pi ( To indicate the rotational motion )
e^(i*pi) = cos(pi) + i*sin(pi) = -1 + i*0 = -1

 So ... e^(i*pi) + 1 = 0    =   G  Blushing
 
 ^^^^^   Hahaha ...That's the grandeur of the God ...the mighty entity that regulates everything ..even the math ..even before humans had discovered that ... Tongue

 Ps : That's Euler's equation ...And even if one solves that with Maclaurin series with complex numbers


 Vintu ...  Ouch

The following 2 member(s) liked the above post:

K.Universe._Angie_

K.Universe.

Goldie

K.Universe.

Joined: 02 September 2012

Posts: 1137

Posted: 12 November 2012 at 10:50am | IP Logged
^^

A beautiful equation indeed! Alas, it's beauty would be lost on 99.99% of the folks anywhere in this world let alone this forum so I am inserting a link here for those interested.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euler%27s_identity#Mathematical_beauty

What Euler did in his equation is LINK five fundamental mathematical constants, namely, 0, 1, p, e, and i.

0 is the additive identity, 1 is the multiplicative identity, p is the circular constant, e is the base of the natural logarithms and i is the imaginary unit. There is absolutely no reason for these numbers to be related but they are in such an elegant manner all thanks to Euler.

One more reason why we should focus on Math if we truly want to understand nature. Science is just a clumsy way of explaining the underlying Math.




The following 3 member(s) liked the above post:

cocojatti92Vintage.Wine_Angie_

ichhadhari

Newbie

ichhadhari

Joined: 20 January 2012

Posts: 33

Posted: 12 November 2012 at 5:20pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by Vintage.Wine



  Okay let's resort to the Math to see if we can garner any clues from that ..

cos(x) + i*sin(x) = (e^(i*x) + e^-(i*x))/2 + i*(e^(i*x) - e^-(i*x))/(2i) = (2*e^(i*x))/2 = e^(pi*x)  

 ^^^  We know that 
cos(x) = (e^(i*x) + e^-(i*x))/2  AND  sin(x) = (e^(i*x) - e^-(i*x))/(2i) 
              

                                                                         Which means 

e^(i*x) = cos(x) + i*sin(x),   ...Now as we  replace X with Pi ( To indicate the rotational motion )
e^(i*pi) = cos(pi) + i*sin(pi) = -1 + i*0 = -1

 So ... e^(i*pi) + 1 = 0    =   G  Blushing
 
 ^^^^^   Hahaha ...That's the grandeur of the God ...the mighty entity that regulates everything ..even the math ..even before humans had discovered that ... Tongue

 Ps : That's Euler's equation ...And even if one solves that with Maclaurin series with complex numbers


 Vintu ...  Ouch



This doesn't explain anything. Like much of the discussion here, what you just said is merely circular reasoning - formula is too good|brilliant|beautiful to be natural, therefore is supernatural or god exists - this is odd.

How can you even attempt to prove anything if you can't even define it ?

1+3 = 4 thus jhinga la la exists .. yayyy !!LOL



Vintage.Wine

Goldie

Vintage.Wine

Joined: 03 July 2012

Posts: 1152

Posted: 12 November 2012 at 9:43pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by ichhadhari

Originally posted by Vintage.Wine





This doesn't explain anything. Like much of the discussion here, what you just said is merely circular reasoning - formula is too good|brilliant|beautiful to be natural, therefore is supernatural or god exists - this is odd.

How can you even attempt to prove anything if you can't even define it ?

1+3 = 4 thus jhinga la la exists .. yayyy !!
LOL


 Icchadhari ... Tongue


  Hahaha ..Yay ! ..nothing can be proven or explained to someone who is deadset against acknowledging the existence of something that binds all forces together so well. Who invented Math ? The God ? Or Euler  or You ?  Sir ? LOL  ..

 I bet that equation defo ain't as frivolous as  1 + 3 = 4 ...LOL  ...It does involve all branches of Math Algebra, The Complex ( It's Vector interpretation which is needed to take into account their argument )  numbers, Calculus  and define their coherence...

 As the Math applies everywhere ...Even to the the stellar bodies and their proper motions , The Galactic Redshifts ..the equation becomes much eminent ...


  But people who have made their decisions to overlook everything and remain wallowed into their cozy world of denials are welcome to do so ..Such specie is alluded to as the Agnostics .. LOL And nothing can change their Belief in Disbelief ...LOL
 
 Yeah ..You are welcome to join the league ...I already have notions of you ...haywire off your face, attired in your new spiffed feather kilt, with me blowing the bagpipe to your Jhinga la la dance .. LOL

 Vintu ...
Tongue


The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

_Angie_

K.Universe.

Goldie

K.Universe.

Joined: 02 September 2012

Posts: 1137

Posted: 14 November 2012 at 1:43pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by ichhadhari

Like much of the discussion here, what you just said is merely circular reasoning - formula is too good|brilliant|beautiful to be natural, therefore is supernatural or god exists - this is odd.


False attribution may be, but definitely not circular reasoning. The premise (Euler's identity) had not assumed the conclusion (God exists). At the most you could accuse Vintage.Wine of jumping to conclusions but in the meantime get your fallacies straight.

BTW, bringing in Euler's Identity as the premise to lead to a conclusion of God could be considered a valid deductive argument. Now, you could contest the conclusion by challenging how the connection is being made between the interconnectedness of the fundamental mathematical constants and the cause for the said interconnectedness and whether that cause is but a  strange coincidence, purely circumstantial if you will, as opposed to being purposefully caused by a God-like-mind as some people seem to be suggesting.


Originally posted by ichhadhari

How can you even attempt to prove anything if you can't even define it ?


If you followed the discussions carefully, you would have noticed that the topic had veered off into the origins of the universe and the possible cause(s) behind existence itself. The fact that Vintage.Wine interspersed his post on Euler's identity with a bunch of emoticons, coupled with the fact that he clearly stated that he is looking for clues, should have clued you in to the intention behind that post.

Originally posted by ichhadhari



This doesn't explain anything.

1+3 = 4 thus jhinga la la exists .. yayyy !!LOL


Actually, I think it explains a lot but I can make an educated guess as to how it might not be apparent to people afflicted with debilitating cretinism.

And your insipid argumentation (of 1+3=4) posed to rival that of the poster who brought in Euler's identity to make his case,  is only suggesting that if you take pile of guano and add 3 more piles of guano to it you would ultimately end up with one big pile of guano. On the other hand, Euler's Identity has  profound implications to folks who are mathematically/philosophically inclined.




The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

Vintage.Wine

return_to_hades

IF-Veteran Member

return_to_hades

Joined: 18 January 2006

Posts: 20670

Posted: 14 November 2012 at 2:21pm | IP Logged
Where is Birdie? Did he find God already? LOL

_Angie_

IF-Rockerz

_Angie_

Joined: 21 February 2008

Posts: 9888

Posted: 15 November 2012 at 10:06am | IP Logged
Originally posted by K.Universe.


BTW, bringing in Euler's Identity as the premise to lead to a conclusion of God could be considered a valid deductive argument. Now, you could contest the conclusion by challenging how the connection is being made between the interconnectedness of the fundamental mathematical constants and the cause for the said interconnectedness and whether that cause is but a  strange coincidence, purely circumstantial if you will, as opposed to being purposefully caused by a God-like-mind as some people seem to be suggesting.



At times I ve been wondering if the mathematical laws are not in nature but in human mind! The surprising thing is the 'laws' and 'mathematics ' designed by human beings are found to fit in. No one thought that non-Euclidean geometry will be of any use but Einstein found that to be useful to develop his General Theory of Relativity.Ideas developed by mathematicians as intellectual exercise without any link to physical world were found to be useful to describe the physical world after years.It does not necessarily mean that nature follows a law...it may mean we are able to find a model to predict the course of nature, may be we go on revising our model , refining it like weather forecasting model ...
As for coincidences...it is easy to dismiss a lot of stuff as mere coincidence but when we look back and take stock,  their sheer volume and impact  is too astounding to be  dismissed Ermm

The following 2 member(s) liked the above post:

Vintage.WineK.Universe.

Post Reply New Post

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Topic Starter Replies Views Last Post
Do you believe there is a God ?

2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 89 90

Summer3 719 31373 18 November 2012 at 11:22pm
By Summer3
do u believe in theory of karma?

2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 11 12

monika. 94 4771 20 September 2011 at 11:49am
By epiphany.
Believe in prophecies ? Rome to tumble 11 May

2

Summer3 10 842 12 May 2011 at 4:20am
By Summer3
Do you believe in "paranormal things"?

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

SolidSnake 71 4072 17 September 2010 at 1:42am
By _Angie_
Do you believe in fairytales?

2

shalini1323 11 801 27 April 2010 at 11:41pm
By Vinzy

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category

Active Forums

Debate Mansion Topic Index

Limit search to this Forum only.

 

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.