tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post6265396814456469866..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Science is circularRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-87972914510412887742013-09-07T13:05:24.554-04:002013-09-07T13:05:24.554-04:00Good post! Thanks, Steve. :-)
Also, quantum physi...Good post! Thanks, Steve. :-)<br /><br />Also, quantum physicists can correct me, but given QM, there are further layers of appearance. Such as the idea that the very act of observing a phenomenon affects the phenomenon. As I once read, this is sort of like checking the tire pressure where it's not possible to measure the tire pressure without letting out some air. What quantum superposition would say is an unobserved particle like an electron exists in all possible quantum states at the same time, but when observed it exists in one. As such, if someone wants a comprehensive description of the electron, then one would have to consider (among other things) all its possible quantum states as well as the various probabilities of the electron being in each state. There are many questions and interpretations surrounding stuff like this. Perhaps a basic question we could ask is: which one(s) or do all best reflect reality and when?Patrick Chanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16095377877712197984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-24634580284983113012013-09-06T21:20:15.119-04:002013-09-06T21:20:15.119-04:00It seems to me that science always seems to operat...It seems to me that science always seems to operate upon the assumption that we have come close to reaching the limits of knowledge and have exhausted possibilities to explain phenomenon that we barely understand in the first place. Weren't the Newtonians surprised by Einstein? And then you have all sorts of ad hoc material thrown in like Dark Matter (the new ether?) and what not. How arrogant for us to think we know so much about the past and how what we see in the present got here, etc. etc. Of course not that it is wrong to continue in the direction of discovery and explanation. God put that in our genes. But it seems there needs to be a bit more epistemic humility. Furthermore, if we take inspiration seriously, then perhaps we should take the Bible's account of origins a little more serious as providing the only viable starting point for what to look for. Wasn't God there? I think that is what a lot of YECers do to the consternation of the rationalist hum buggers. And the better ones hold to a provisional outlook on theory making. That is why I like a guy like Russell Humphreys who saw the problems with his distant starlight theory and has begun formulating new ideas. MSChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05419145542442539462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-71087955372142744762013-09-06T16:37:09.603-04:002013-09-06T16:37:09.603-04:00I hope it didn't leak out of your ears. So lon...I hope it didn't leak out of your ears. So long as you have a turkey baster to squirt the liquified gray matter back into your cranium. Mustn't let such a fine brain go to waste! stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-70731055646961616022013-09-06T16:06:53.039-04:002013-09-06T16:06:53.039-04:00I don't mind telling you that my brain just me...I don't mind telling you that my brain just melted.Rhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-53429357938474842682013-09-06T15:18:12.013-04:002013-09-06T15:18:12.013-04:00Speaking of dating and YEC, I came across this and...Speaking of dating and YEC, I came across this and thought it was interesting:<br /><br />http://blog.drwile.com/?p=139<br /><br />http://blog.drwile.com/?p=9425Matheteshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13527032591499860552noreply@blogger.com