ERayR Posted September 24, 2011 Posted September 24, 2011 This raises an important issue: to be reconciled with physics, Mormon theology would seem to require the existence of some sort of faster-than-light communication. The Mormon God (and particularly the Holy Spirit), being bound by the laws of the universe, has to be able to communicate with the far reaches of the galaxy by sending and receiving signals faster than the speed of light.Answer: What is faser than the speed of thought?
ERayR Posted September 24, 2011 Posted September 24, 2011 Since the Holy Ghost testifies to the truth of everything, prayer should do the trick, provided we ask with a sincere heart (which all these godless atheist scientists can never do, of course). A true believer doesn't need a particle accelerator!And a true disbeliever never needs anything because their mind is already made up. No matter what it couldn't be.
sethpayne Posted September 24, 2011 Posted September 24, 2011 Well it looks like Hawking and others who Worship at the Altars of Science are going back to the drawing board once again...http://gizmodo.com/5...lativity-theoryYour response perplexes me. First, before any conclusions can be drawn this experiment must be repeated by multiple researchers under controlled conditions.Second, even if we have found a particle traveling faster than the speed of light doesn't mean that Einstein has been "disproved" any more than Einstein "disproved" Newtonian physics. Both Einstein and Newton are correct. Their theories aren't perfect. In fact, I'm sure Einstein would be delighted to learn this new information. This helps us gain a better understanding the laws with which God governs our universe.
Zakuska Posted September 24, 2011 Author Posted September 24, 2011 Your response perplexes me. First, before any conclusions can be drawn this experiment must be repeated by multiple researchers under controlled conditions.Second, even if we have found a particle traveling faster than the speed of light doesn't mean that Einstein has been "disproved" any more than Einstein "disproved" Newtonian physics. Both Einstein and Newton are correct. Their theories aren't perfect. In fact, I'm sure Einstein would be delighted to learn this new information. This helps us gain a better understanding the laws with which God governs our universe.1st... its not me you have to worry about. It's all the news reporters and "scientists" responding to them.eg. "The implications are that Einstein’s special relativity is wrong and that’s earth-shattering stuff,” Trotta said. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-23/neutrinos-caught-speeding-may-break-einstein-s-cosmic-limit.htmlI fully agree more tests need to be done, and thats why I named my thread with a ?
kolipoki09 Posted September 24, 2011 Posted September 24, 2011 Both Einstein and Newton are correct. Their theories aren't perfect. In fact, I'm sure Einstein would be delighted to learn this new information. This helps us gain a better understanding the laws with which God governs our universe.Earlier today during my Philosophy of Science class my professor (a former NASA engineer and current astrophysicist) essentially said the same thing. The history of science is full of flips and changes, but it doesn't mean science is a worthless means of understanding truths about the universe. As for my professor's reaction, he was extremely cautious - but it isn't the first time something like this has been claimed. There's a lot of media hype over it, but until it's published, peer-reviewed and can be retested elsewhere, the likelihood of this new "discovery" gaining much of a foothold remains uncertain.
thesometimesaint Posted September 24, 2011 Posted September 24, 2011 Tarski:We're really at the limits of theory here, Tachyons of course MAY exist, That wouild make faster than light travel at least theoretically possible, but my gut reaction is that that would apply only to information, and not physical objects, I haven't seen any hard evidence for them but as you say there is nothing that says that can't exist. As with the frontiers of any human endevor we'll just have to WAFO.
Ariarates Posted September 24, 2011 Posted September 24, 2011 "Behold, you have not understood; you have supposed that I would give it unto you, when you took no thought save it was to ask me. “But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right.Man, now I have to learn particle physics too?On the other hand, it would be a welcome change to the RS/PH manuals. Would be hard to find enough qualified teachers, though ;-) 1
thesometimesaint Posted September 25, 2011 Posted September 25, 2011 Ariarates:If we are to become like God then I think particle physics would be on the plate of things to learn. But I don't believe that it is necessary to learn about it in Sunday School, or the other Church meetings.First learn faith then all else will be added to you.
Programmer Posted September 26, 2011 Posted September 26, 2011 Even if the physicists have discovered faster-than-light particles, this does not disprove Einstein's famous E=mc2 equation. Einstein's theory never excluded faster-than-light particles. It only says that a particle with mass cannot travel at exactly the speed of light, because such travel would require an infinite amount of energy. But such faster-than-light particles have been problematic for other reasons, mostly having to do with information theory. If such particles are possible, you should be able to receive a signal from someone before they have sent it. But that would violate information theory.This raises an important issue: to be reconciled with physics, Mormon theology would seem to require the existence of some sort of faster-than-light communication. The Mormon God (and particularly the Holy Spirit), being bound by the laws of the universe, has to be able to communicate with the far reaches of the galaxy by sending and receiving signals faster than the speed of light.The speed of light is governed by two physical constants, the permeability and permativity of free space. These constants if manipulated can affect the speed of Electrico magnetic transmission (of which light is a small subset). Anyone who has studied calculus knows that the derivative of a 1st order polynomial is a constant. That is, in a higher dimension a value can vary, but strip out a dimension,and that polynomial is represented merely by a constant. I happen to believe that the universe is made up of way more than 3 + 1 dimensions. Modern string theory is based off of the assumptions of higher dimensions.
Calm Posted September 26, 2011 Posted September 26, 2011 Anyone who has studied calculus knows that the derivative of a 1st order polynomial is a constant..unless we have forgotten it. Algebra may be embedded into my DNA, but alas not so much calculus.
thesometimesaint Posted September 26, 2011 Posted September 26, 2011 Algebra may describe the ball, but to put it into motion takes calculus. Whether we know the formularic calculations of calculus or not, everytime we drive a car we are using calculus.
sjdawg Posted September 26, 2011 Posted September 26, 2011 I agree with you. The only problem with Science, is when people abuse it and set it in cement and use the block as a weapon, to say see... the thinking has been done.Yes, I know when I get tired of close minded thinking I always rush to religion. It is the last harbor of open-minded people.
Tarski Posted September 26, 2011 Posted September 26, 2011 The speed of light is governed by two physical constants, the permeability and permativity of free space. These constants if manipulated can affect the speed of Electrico magnetic transmission (of which light is a small subset). Anyone who has studied calculus knows that the derivative of a 1st order polynomial is a constant. That is, in a higher dimension a value can vary, but strip out a dimension,and that polynomial is represented merely by a constant.I happen to believe that the universe is made up of way more than 3 + 1 dimensions. Modern string theory is based off of the assumptions of higher dimensions.Huh? What has a first order polynomial got to do with the fact that the speed of light in a medium is the square root of the reciprocal of the permittivity ε and permeability µ of the medium? The speed of light in a vacuum is what matters by the way and in fact, it is probably just a contingent fact that light travels at that speed. All we need for relativity is some maximum speed and the resulting Lorentz transformations.The connection between the order of a polynomial and the dimension of spacetime also seems obscure. What the heck are you talking about??
thesometimesaint Posted September 26, 2011 Posted September 26, 2011 Tarski:Thought you might find this interesting.http://idealab.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/was-einstein-wrong-us-accelerator-lab-to-test-cerns-results.php?ref=fpb
Tarski Posted September 26, 2011 Posted September 26, 2011 Tarski:Thought you might find this interesting.http://idealab.talki...lts.php?ref=fpbHere is one for you :http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=140754734"If this result holds, and I kind of doubt it, it means we'll have to rewrite all of modern physics," said Kaku, author of the book "Physics of the Future" and host of a Science Channel television show. "Einstein has come out ahead every single time. However, this time you're talking about the largest particle accelerator in the world registering a significant deviation in relativity."Columbia University physicist Brian Greene said he would "bet just about everything I hold dear that this won't hold up to scrutiny." But even if the results are confirmed, Einstein's theories will need more of a patch than anything else, he said.
Zakuska Posted September 26, 2011 Author Posted September 26, 2011 "Ereditato had a beer in hand and was asked about the idea that his work was challenging the secular saint of modern physics."Science, Sex, and Sacred Cows.
Analytics Posted September 26, 2011 Posted September 26, 2011 Well it looks like Hawking and others who Worship at the Altars of Science are going back to the drawing board once again...http://gizmodo.com/5...lativity-theoryPersonally, I believe all that science has revealed, all that it now reveals, and believe that it will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the nature of reality. This is a story of science expanding its horizons. Isn't it marvelous?
KevinG Posted September 26, 2011 Posted September 26, 2011 Scientists who believe that they have all knowledge and that their answers are infallable share a common fault with religionists who believe that they have all knowledge and that their answers are infallable. That's is the source of their common disdain.
Zakuska Posted September 26, 2011 Author Posted September 26, 2011 Personally, I believe all that science has revealed, all that it now reveals, and believe that it will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the nature of reality. This is a story of science expanding its horizons. Isn't it marvelous?See... you really are a Mormon. Continuing Revelation of the Scientists. It is a Marvelous work and a wonder.
Franktalk Posted September 27, 2011 Posted September 27, 2011 The spirit world is not bound by the fabric of space. The fabric of space is a subset of a much finer grained existence that is in heaven or the spirit world. There are probably dimensionality differences as well. In the case of this particle it may not be traveling faster than light. These kind of things have come up before and it was always an error in frame of reference that was incorrect. I don't worry about this stuff. Let a year go by and see if it still is unsolved. There is no rush. Just a change in elevation from the source to the target can cause a time reference problem."Spirits are just as familiar with spirits as bodies are with bodies, though spirits are composed of matter so refined as not to be tangible to this coarser organization. They walk, converse, and have their meetings; and the spirits of good men like Joseph and the Elders, who have left this Church on earth for a season to operate in another sphere, are rallying all their powers and going from place to place preaching the Gospel, and Joseph is directing them, saying, go ahead, my brethren, and if they hedge up your way, walk up and command them to disperse. You have the Priesthood and can disperse them, but if any of them wish to hear the Gospel, preach to them (DBY, 379)."http://lds.org/manual/teachings-of-presidents-of-the-church-brigham-young/chapter-38-the-spirit-world?lang=eng&query=brigham+young+spirit+worldI came to this same conclusion when I was studying quantum mechanics (as a hobby). But I did not know it was related to the spirit world I just knew there was a higher order existence. When I read the Bible for the first time I placed heaven as the finer grained reality. And God space as even finer.
BCSpace Posted September 27, 2011 Posted September 27, 2011 Well it looks like Hawking and others who Worship at the Altars of Science are going back to the drawing board once again...I think the argument could be made that LDS doctrine is that we worship on the altars of science; God Himself being the chief scientist. Science itself is willing to accept new truth. Not all religions can say that, but we LDS can because we've incorporated all truth.
The Nehor Posted September 27, 2011 Posted September 27, 2011 I think the argument could be made that LDS doctrine is that we worship on the altars of science; God Himself being the chief scientist. Science itself is willing to accept new truth. Not all religions can say that, but we LDS can because we've incorporated all truth.Uhhhh, no we haven't:"We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God."
Franktalk Posted September 27, 2011 Posted September 27, 2011 (edited) I think the argument could be made that LDS doctrine is that we worship on the altars of science; God Himself being the chief scientist. Science itself is willing to accept new truth. Not all religions can say that, but we LDS can because we've incorporated all truth.The problem is science is based on theory and not final fact. So where the LDS are based on final fact science lags behind. We have faith that final fact will match our doctrine and faith. So we are not afraid of science but embrace the progress towards truth. We should never assume that current science holds truth. This shake up in science should give us pause yet again not to trust the ideas of man. As man progresses towards truth he will stumble along the way. We should all be aware of this stumbling block and not get too wrapped in the moving target but keep focused on the end goal of truth of which current science offers little.I do not worship at the altar of science, I worship at the altar of truth. The LDS church does not worship at the altar of science. You really need to get your head straight. Edited September 27, 2011 by Franktalk
The Nehor Posted September 27, 2011 Posted September 27, 2011 (edited) The problem is science is based on theory and not final fact. So where the LDS are based on final fact science lags behind. We have faith that final fact will match our doctrine and faith. So we are not afraid of science but embrace the progress towards truth. We should never assume that current science holds truth. This shake up in science should give us pause yet again not to trust the ideas of man. As man progresses towards truth he will stumble along the way. We should all be aware of this stumbling block and not get too wrapped in the moving target but keep focused on the end goal of truth of which current science offers little.I would argue that this would be an accurate way to describe the growth of spiritual knowledge as well. I've held incorrect assumptions before that God has gently (and not-so-gently) removed. There are insights and understanding about the character of God that come that wipe away previous misconceptions. If we could truly sort out what is pure revelation and what are doctrinal accretions we've added onto it (through personal misunderstanding, LDS cultural traditions, mistakes taught by parents, misunderstandings, conclusions based on misunderstood premises) then we could say we've arrived at "the facts" but I doubt anyone here is at that point.In any case being dogmatic is bad even if you are right. Dogmatic people rarely search for (and therefore rarely get) new revelation.This is in my opinion one of the main moral lessons of Job. His friends thought they had it all figured out and were willing to slap down Job for doubting. But Job didn't doubt God. It was just that the circumstances and events of his life were incompatible with what he knew of God and he was desperately trying to reason it out. In the end God commended Job and condemned his friends. Edited September 27, 2011 by The Nehor 1
Recommended Posts