/sci/ - Science & Math

>>3808479

this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3S0LNGA2hp8

Why do atheists have such a low self esteem and a deniel of default moral values.
Who do you guys think you are to know better?

Things you know for sure should be the things to rely on.
The fact that you are the appearance of a human being including a world around you is one of verry few facts that could be considered absolute truth. This is the highest form of knowledge to reality and this is what should compose your worldview. Mysticism and thought has been the default point of view of human beings for millenia.

Of course sceince and logic are important aspects of modern society, but they are not the only and defenetly not the last truths. A worldview based on logic, in an unlogic world is doomed to fail anyway.

ps. Lack to the belief in a God == Lack to the world around you

>>2479549

>Time is an emergent phenomenon based on the fact that apparently causally related events are more likely than non-causally related events. That is, what you call the "flow of time" is really confusion on your part between equivalent universes.

wow that sounded arrogant.

>>2450325
>>2450327

O wait, we are showing off our intellect with big words and compex sentences.

Just because we fail to discribe something in words, does that automaticly mean it`s non-existent?

Every word and sentence is a description of some entity, phenomena or abstraction.

Any description build up with words becomes part of reasoned paradigms.
And thus automaticly becomes part of determinism or randomness.

So any description of free will automaticly disproves itself, it becomes a paradox.

i believe ultimate reality cannot be described in words though.
An enclosed defenition of free will is impossible because it by defenition contains "some element that can not be known".

35,5^2 = (B+5,9)^2 + (L-0,2)^2
25,2^2 = (B-0,2)^2 + (L-5,9)^2

Just looking for B and L.. don`t care the maths behind it.. is it even possible to solve ???

>>2418873
>>2418881
>>2418931


Computer is actually a wrong word for such a future-predicting device becoase it should not be compared with process technology anno 2011.

It would just be a device that uses characteristics on the quantum scale, and read out information about a particle, information that might be entanglent to another position in space or time.

Double slit experiment is the grandaddy of all such devices. qm physicists have seriously considered much more complex variations to that experiment that would make such a "what if" machine.
At this moment it`s a common stand that even qm information can not go back in time. But if it turned out it IS possible they would most likely cover it up though.