16 Aug 10
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonWhat!
“…If the gravity experiment was re-done by dropping weights from the Tower of Pisa, then for one thing, the heavier object will hit the dirt first….”
What!
No it wouldn’t!
Not unless gravity suddenly worked differently from how it behaved in all previously observed occasions!
“…Secondly, we do not know that the laws of physics (as we unders ...[text shortened]... nreasonable to assume that the laws are probably not constant when there is no evidence of this!
No it wouldn’t!
Not unless gravity suddenly worked differently from how it behaved in all previously observed occasions!
I think I should apologise to a few people here. I posted that one without checking on my facts. I had heard somewhere (probably on QI!) that Galileo had never done the experiment, partly because he knew the heavier object would hit first, due to wind resistance slowing the lighter one down. I already had a niggling doubt that this could be accounted for by making the heavier object also bigger by an appropriate amount but had not thought it through significantly.
Having read a little more about it, it seems that he probably did not do the experiment but proposed a thought experiment explaining the phenomenon. Several people did do such experiments and found that the objects landed much closer together than the prevailing Aristotlian view suggested.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo%27s_Leaning_Tower_of_Pisa_experiment
http://www.endex.com/gf/buildings/ltpisa/ltpnews/physnews1.htm
http://www.jimloy.com/physics/galileo.htm
Essentially I believe if the objects are the same size, and possibly even if they are the same density but I am less confident of this, the lighter one will be slowed more by the air and thus the heavier would hit first, but this would not have been measurable at the time.
The laws of physics as we understand them must be at least approximately correct else much of our technology that relies on quantum physics and relativity would not work.
Indeed so, I was playing devils advocate here. We must assume our understanding of the laws are accurate and that the laws are constant unless we have good evidence that they are not.
Also, my comments to Fabian were not well argued. I do disagree that religion and science never overlap. I think that religion often makes statements that can be tested scientifically and when such tests are done, it is the results of the scientific tests that hold weight
So apologies to all for my crap arguments.
--- Penguin.
- Joined
- 30 May 09
- Moves
- 30120
16 Aug 10
Originally posted by PenguinI think you might be being a bit hard on yourself there. The trouble with science and religion is that their advocates frequently trespass on each other's territory.
[b]What!
No it wouldn’t!
Not unless gravity suddenly worked differently from how it behaved in all previously observed occasions!
I think I should apologise to a few people here. I posted that one without checking on my facts. I had heard somewhere (probably on QI!) that Galileo had never done the experiment, partly because he knew the heavier obj ...[text shortened]... scientific tests that hold weight
So apologies to all for my crap arguments.
--- Penguin.[/b]
On the physics, I'm sure I've seen footage of a hammer and a feather on the moon but I could be confabulating there.
I was a bit puzzled when you said:
Essentially I believe if the objects are the same size, and possibly even if they are the same density but I am less confident of this,
...since if they were the same size and density then they'd be the same weight wouldn't they?
Surely the trick is to make the lighter of the two very heavy, but a fraction of the weight of the heavy thing, then air resistance won't affect things much.
17 Aug 10
2 edits
Originally posted by Lord SharkOn the physics, I'm sure I've seen footage of a hammer and a feather on the moon but I could be confabulating there.
I think you might be being a bit hard on yourself there. The trouble with science and religion is that their advocates frequently trespass on each other's territory.
On the physics, I'm sure I've seen footage of a hammer and a feather on the moon but I could be confabulating there.
I was a bit puzzled when you said:
Essentially I believe if ...[text shortened]... a fraction of the weight of the heavy thing, then air resistance won't affect things much.
No you are not confabulating, it's on the wikipedia page I linked to.
...since if they were the same size and density then they'd be the same weight wouldn't they
Yes, my bad explanation there. If they are the same size (lighter one of a lower density) then the lighter one will be slowed more by air resistance. If they are the same density (lighter one is smaller) then I think it may still be slowed more by the air (something to do with ratios of surface area to volume).
As you say, if both weights are reasonably heavy and dense, the effect of the air will become less and less relevant. I was nitpicking and should have said so from the start.
In order for Fabian's statement that science and religion can never mix to be true, religion has to continually retreat as science advances into areas that were previously considered its domain. Eventually, religion will not have a domain at all.
--- Penguin.
17 Aug 10
Originally posted by Penguin“…In order for Fabian's statement that science and religion can never mix to be true, religion has to continually retreat as science advances into areas that were previously considered its domain. Eventually, religion will not have a domain at all….”
[b]On the physics, I'm sure I've seen footage of a hammer and a feather on the moon but I could be confabulating there.
No you are not confabulating, it's on the wikipedia page I linked to.
...since if they were the same size and density then they'd be the same weight wouldn't they
Yes, my bad explanation there. If they are the sam ...[text shortened]... considered its domain. Eventually, religion will not have a domain at all.
--- Penguin.[/b]
Yes! Yippee! 😀
- Joined
- 30 May 09
- Moves
- 30120
17 Aug 10
In order for Fabian's statement that science and religion can never mix to be true, religion has to continually retreat as science advances into areas that were previously considered its domain. Eventually, religion will not have a domain at all.
I think that's unlikely.
17 Aug 10
Originally posted by PenguinThey,(school), asked me if my son wanted to participate in "reilgous studies"?
You've pasted that same sentence several times in this thread so far. It doesn't sound like an atheist thing to say, since we would tend not to believe in such a thing as zombies but presumably you've seen it somewhere. Could you reference the post?
Why am I here?
I am interested in why people believe in the supernatural, how religions and super ...[text shortened]... affects us, even if we have no interest in it.
We also love an argument!
--- Penguin.
My intelligence is insulted by that. It's clearly christian propaganda and nothing else😛 "religous studies"??...yeah right!!!
17 Aug 10
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonI agree I myself do not practice religion. Religion is full of tradition which dictates the action of the people follow. Often keeping those in power, in power. I am working on a relationship. My church pastor once said in a sermon "don't trust me, don't trust our bishop, deacons no one in the church" followed by "we are all men, and man can be tempted, the bible says to trust the Lord, an I am your pastor not God. So as your pastor I am telling you that I am not perfect". "We need a relationship with God not a religion". "Religion is full of tradition, which more often than not pushes people away". Unfortunatly that kind of talk is not often in my opinion preached (subject change)As for as Jesus is concerned there is evidence that he did walk the earth, and I myself have witnessed mircles. I would elaborate but most of the time after I tell people what I have seen they accuse me of being on drugs or exagerating the story. If u would like to know just ask.
Religion restricts everyone’s freedom of thought who believe in it because religion tells us what we should believe prior to inspecting evidence or reason.
Religion is an insult to the intellect for that reason.
( and that is not even to mention the political oppression religion has imposed on many people throughout history –the Spanish Inquisition being only one example ).
Back to the subject I agree with you, but I believe that it's man who used religion to oppress others. That was either a love for power, or it could have been their love for God, but that does not accuratly represent the love of God. Hope to hear from soon I enjoy this conversation.
17 Aug 10
Originally posted by karoly aczelOddly enough my mother is a school teacher, and several of her friends of course which are scattered throuout the district. When the subject of religious studies came up Christianity was not on the list, it was more of the new age or muslim. But why is that regardless if its christian or not a insult to your intelligence.
They,(school), asked me if my son wanted to participate in "reilgous studies"?
My intelligence is insulted by that. It's clearly christian propaganda and nothing else😛 "religous studies"??...yeah right!!!
17 Aug 10
Originally posted by realeyezI, for one would like to hear one of your spiritual stories.
I agree I myself do not practice religion. Religion is full of tradition which dictates the action of the people follow. Often keeping those in power, in power. I am working on a relationship. My church pastor once said in a sermon "don't trust me, don't trust our bishop, deacons no one in the church" followed by "we are all men, and man can be tempted, the ...[text shortened]... ccuratly represent the love of God. Hope to hear from soon I enjoy this conversation.
The only religon I follow is my own. Organized religon is counter-productive.
17 Aug 10
Originally posted by realeyezBasically I would want my son to get educated in the history of various religons and let him decide for himself which one he may or may not want to follow.
Oddly enough my mother is a school teacher, and several of her friends of course which are scattered throuout the district. When the subject of religious studies came up Christianity was not on the list, it was more of the new age or muslim. But why is that regardless if its christian or not a insult to your intelligence.
17 Aug 10
Originally posted by FabianFnasThere is a difference between showing that a claim is unlikely, or providing evidence against it, and showing conclusively that it is false. Science never achieves certainty. That it possible that God could confound our attempts to test religious claims doesn't mean that our tests of those religious claims fail to provide us with evidence.
Yes, I think it is impossible to attempt scientifically assess whether, for instance, prayer aids the sick. If the experiment yielded negative result, how would we know if god didn't want to participate?
Let's say that we redo the experiment of Galilei, by letting weights go from the tower of Pisa. It always work. If it doesn't, the reason was not beca ...[text shortened]... scientific experiments in the domain of religion. But there will be no trustworthy answers.
18 Aug 10
Originally posted by karoly aczelBefore I started going to church I believed in everything else I study 11 different religions at the same same time which includes black magic. I did this for six years and I started to see things. Demons to be exact. I became a mental mess. I couldnt sleep, bruises would form on my body without reason. It was hell in a sence. Til one day when I was desparate, scare, and tired of being chased, you cant run from demons. My dad said a pray for me in Jesus name, tho I did not believe in Him. It stop instintly like turning a light speed. Since then I have believed in Jesus He ended my maddness. I have slept in a bed and have levitated off the mattress, I've seen objects float across the room. I've had demons walk through me and I had demons torment me. It all ended because of Jesus. Ive never done drugs and I dont drink, I was not high for any of these events. Feel free to ask any questions you have.
Feel free to challenge me anytime🙂
If you have faith in Jesus thats great. Could you briefly tell me how you got saved? Was it by Jesus personally, or members of your church? Besause if it was by Jesus himself , I'm sure it was not in person.
I have more questions , but I'll just keep it simple for now and we'll go from there...
18 Aug 10
1 edit
Originally posted by PenguinOriginally posted by Penguin
Ouch Fabian,
You've mentioned this a few times and I think it needs proper discussion. Maybe not in this thread and maybe not even in this forum.
If the gravity experiment was re-done by dropping weights from the Tower of Pisa, then for one thing, the heavier object will hit the dirt first. Secondly, we do not know that the laws of physics (as we under it an extra little push.
If you wish to respond, please start a new thread.
--- Penguin.
If the gravity experiment was re-done by dropping weights from the Tower of Pisa, then for one thing, the heavier object will hit the dirt first.
Ouch Penguin, very much ouch!
The Galilei experiment really showed that objects falls with the same velocity independent of their masses. Experiments in space has shown that feathers falls exactly as fast as any other objects. If we take account of air resistance, then objects falls with different velocities, but that has nothing to do with gravitation. The gravitational constant is truly constant, the mass has nothing to do with it.
Isn't this shown in physics books for children in elementary schools?
A friend of mine, who apearantly was sick during that day in school honestely believed that 1 kg of led was heavier than 1 kg of cotton! I explained to him why he was wrong, but he wasn't easily convinced.
Originally posted by Penguin
we will eventually have to conclude that our understanding of the gravitational laws is incorrect.
Again ouch.
Yes we know.
If we couln't rely of the gravitational constant really is constant, then we couldn't build large structure, like bridges, sky-scrapers, and such. We couldn't do any space exploration, because we couldn't know the gravitational constants all its route. Satellites would fall, Voyager couldn't send us the pictures from Jupeter and Saturn. Apollo missions would be too dangerous. And so on.
We rely heavily that the gravitational constant really is constant. We measure it with a high degree of accuracy and we have never found any fluctuations.
And we are open to other possibilities. Trust me on that. We measure and remeasure every constant oftenly to get us another decimal, and another again, in order to perfect our measurement devices and theories. We would have known if the constans are not constants.
So, ouch Penguin, ouch!