(October 7, 2015 at 1:27 pm)Rekeisha Wrote:(October 6, 2015 at 4:33 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote: That people think physics hasn't advanced since Aristotle's observations about causality?
The truth is, of course, that I know what she meant to ask. It's one of the last long-standing debates between physicists and theologians (which sometimes includes working physicists), put simply as: "why is there anything rather than nothing?" and/or "why are there describable, consistent laws of physics at all?"
We don't know. Nobody knows. But we have some pretty good ideas. However, since her "you can't account for uniformity" is not only a badly-worded physics question but is obviously a question well beyond her education level, and thus had to have been "handed to her on a platter, for serving cold to those Damned Atheists", so to speak, I didn't feel the need to take it seriously. Apologetic nonsense shoved in my face is bad enough, even when the person is willing/prepared to have a serious discussion of the concepts they are proposing to discuss... but when it's obvious that they view the question as a bullet fired from a gun, which if it misses they will simply reload a new, different bullet to fire my way, I have no reason to take them seriously or treat them with any more dignity than they are showing me.
Tell me truly, Chad... do you honestly think Rekeisha would be able (or willing) to have as serious discussion about the ongoing debate between models by atheist physicists like Krauss or Hartle-Hawking and theist physicists who suggest various anthropic principle arguments like teleology (what I would call teleonomy), and that she is both educated and honest enough to acknowledge weaknesses in her arguments rather than just repeating them at me, over and over, a la William Lane Craig?
Before I even start to reply to such "easy question, long answer" statements, I must consider the intent of the poster. If it is clear that they are just using such arguments as bullets linked in a machinegun's ammo-belt, there is no point to wasting my time, and I will respond with mere mockery. However, since you have proved to be more educated and thoughtful, I gave you a full reply.
If it is so easy to explain and run over my argument then do so
Do you have infinite knowledge? If you don't then how can you know that no on knows?
