In truth all of the scientific evidence supports this and no scientific evidence disputes it. Some with religious beliefs hold an opinion that a person has a "soul" but there has never been any scientific evidence of the "soul" existing.
Then clearly the "scientific" evidence is inadequtate to serve as a foundation for intelligent commentary on any aspect of human (as distinct from animal) nature, since it cannot account for such commonplace phenomena as the voice of conscience - by which, of course, I do not mean "social conscience".
This should help. http://profmattstrassler.com/articl...the-structure-of-matter/protons-and-neutrons/
Your guess is wrong. Protons and electron are not atoms. They are particles. Particles aren't atoms. It will look for an extra electron. If it takes it from sodium then you have the ion nacl. Matter is made up of atoms.
Well Dennis, I'm conflicted. On one hand, I don't want to believe in the viability of visions of the future. On the other hand, I secretly want it to be so because I've had my own visions years ago and I think it's cool! But I'm a little crazy in the head and I can't trust anything from my past. But, you've just inspired me to (foolishly?) write a blog entry to the forums: Adventures in Madness: The Lifeline. Thanks.
Just because science hasn't got an answer for something yet, doesn't mean it won't. Actually, several theories have been developed recently that may explain consciousness (see here).
No scientific evidence can dispute the existence of a soul in its current limited form. As long as our science remains stuck in its current clumsy incomplete configuration its ability to understand or describe the physical world, much less anything else (such as the happenings inside a singularity) will not occur. So I have little confidence in its ability to discover the soul when it' struggles, and so far has failed to describe or understand the workings of sentience and or self awareness. Maybe when and if science gains the new tools it needs ie a new understanding of Physics as Hawking lamented, it may, just may be able to fully understand the physical universe that its tasked itself with. Its only then that it might be able to discover then understand the inkling of a universe or realm that is NOT physical. Sadly I am not optimistic that science will in the foreseeable future even acquire the tools it requires to understand that singularity I mentioned early. It is determined to ignore metaphysics and of course anything not of the physical universe, additionally considering the fraud lies and mistakes science has presented the past my pessimism grows not subsides as time progresses. I should have studied philosophy instead of hard science...because ever since Locke philosophical concepts and understand are far better tools for understanding the non physical than science has then or even after all these centuries, now....and dats' the facts jacks, according to me, the man behind the curtain...but pay attention to this one! Lol... reva
Ever read anything from the theist Locke who lived in the 1600's? Good stuff. Google it if your answer is 'no'. reva
Quantum entanglement comes to mind. QE could help explain via science (uhhh) how certain religious phenomenon and things that are not understood or are rejected as being true such as prophesy etc could work. If a particle here on earth is entangled with a particle across the universe a billion light years away it instantly influences each other. If you use your particle spinner to spin your earthly particle right the particle will instantly spin right at the far end of the universe, light speed be dammed. So how does that work? I am sure that some time in the future we will find that quantum events ie micro events will effect the macro world (ie big things like we humans etc). And that my friends will explain nearly everything. reva
"Just because science hasn't got an answer for something yet doesn't mean it won't" Agreed! Maybe one day it will find God the owner of our souls. Until then color me skeptical but grateful* of and for science. * I am of the opinion that modern civilizations are not better off than an civilization of indigenous south American Indians. They have lived in harmony with their world and are not slaves to modern technology including the bad things like an H bombs etc. However we have opened Pandora box of technology and its been open for hundreds of years, too late to close it eh? reva
If you don't think a proton and electron make an atom then I have no clue what your definition of an atom is, much less matter.
The "voice of conscience"???? Did you make this up? There is no such thing nor has there ever been as "moral beliefs" (i.e. the voice of conscience) are aways established by indoctrination. There isn't an inherent "voice of conscience" in the human species anymore than there is in whales or chimpanzies or a sea slug. A person "learns" what is right and wrong from others as there in no inherent understanding of either (i.e. a voice of conscience). For example a person taught that murder is acceptable has no regrets when they commit murder.
Mankind and scientists have searched for any evidence of god and/or the soul for millenniums but have found no evidence of either existing. We have a million times more evidence of Big Foot existing in downtown Seattle than we do for god or the soul in the entire history of mankind. That's why a "belief in god" is referred to as "faith" because there is zero actual evidence to support the belief. If there was evidence then "faith" is not required.
It is impossible to prove a negative. Nothing that doesn't exist can be proved to never exist in science. Science only deals with evidence and not a lack of evidence. There is no evidence of god or the soul and science cannot address a lack of evidence existing except to state that no evidence exist. That is a limitation of science and human thought. By way of example science cannot claim that god and the soul don't exist in a completely different universe from our own universe of course but that would have no importance in our universe at all. Science can accurately state that there has been no evidence of god or the soul in our universe of course. Scientific theory can even establish a high probability of other universes existing but those theories don't include "god" or the "soul" because there is no mathmatical foundation for establishing that god or the soul exists in any possible universe. There has to be a basis in fact before math can extrapolate that into predictions of possible outcomes.
Maybe one day science will find God the owner of our souls. Until then, color me skeptical of religion. Well, considering that stone-age hunter/gatherer technology could not feed 7 billion people, I think it is a little late to close Pandora's box. As for living in harmony with our would, being slaves to modern technology and having H bombs, those are all choices. We CHOOSE to have a society that places profit, consumerism and war over harmony, well being and peace. It always amuses me when someone on the Internet talks about how much better stone-age civilizations are. The irony is delicious. Me, I like having modern medicine and the sum of human knowledge at my fingertips.
One who believes this can never be anything but a tyrant or a hanidmaiden thereof. Prove it. If those "searchers" are anything like you, what they're really searching for is justification for what they've become as a consequence of throwing away the knowledge you say they're looking for.
I misread your post. I thought you were asking if a proton or an electron are atoms. At any rate, protons, neutrons and electrons aren't matter as you define it. Matter is created of atoms.
No problem. If you want to hold to that definition then the Sun is not composed of matter. I find that odd.
OK....there are a few concepts or definitions of a Quantum Vacuum. One concept is to tap ENDLESS amounts of energy that would be derived from a ZERO POINT MODULE...please forgive the Stargate reference. The other concept I could only explain with Mathematics and even though I am good at such things even for me it is extremely long and difficult. Now as far as the LINK you posted and this is a bit from that LINK...... .......These are new-generation generators that tap into the so-called Quantum Vacuum electromagnetic potential of the space around us. It is estimated that every cubic centimeter of space has enough potential energy to run the world's energy needs for one day, if it could be properly tapped. These innovative generators perturb, or stimulate, this environmental electromagnetic energy to run the generator and supply power to a home, business or car. This is a LOT different from the two examples I have detailed with poor extent as they are much too long and complex Mathematical Equations and I would have cut and paste 75% of the Mathematical symbols. But this link and what it details....well it seems to be talking about somehow tapping into QED as QED....Quantum Electrodynamics is not so easily TAPPED!!!! I have NO IDEA how they would tap into it and they do not explain anything so I would be HIGHLY DUBIOUS of that link. AboveAlpha
Current existing 100 Quibit and 1000 Quibit Quantum Computers ise the Many Worlds or Multiversal Theory Models. The two Models are similar as Multiversal Theory is a much more complex and comprehensive version of Many Worlds. AboveAlpha
I agree. This LINK is more Marketing than it is scientific explaination. Sorry Dennis...you are a Good Guy but the people who created that Website are NOT! AboveAlpha
Elements are atoms but matter is anything with mass which includes subatomic particles. Even the Higgs bison has mass.
