Originally posted by FreakyKBHIt could be a sticky thread. Or slap it in your profile.
"Dear Gentle Reader,
I am a Bible-believing Christian who's singular mission within this forum is to convince as many people as possible to substitute their work for the work done on their behalf on the cross by the Lord Jesus Christ. Doing so will place them in a state of eternal bliss/joy/wonderment; whereas rejection of this exchange will keep them ...[text shortened]... e to see you in heaven is in the forefront of all my conversations with you.
Love,
Freaky"
Be sure to mention that you're a premillenial dispensationalist. It'd decomplexify matters for a heap a folks.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHIt's a pretty rubbish analogy anyway. First, there's probably something like 170 billion galaxies in the observable universe. For arguments sake, let's say 100 billion stars per galaxy.... Secondly, you're assuming it's a purely random process, which hardly a given. Chaos theory shows the propensity for order to spontaneously arise from chaotic conditions in an entirely un-random way. So.... busted.
Make it 13.75 billion computers and re-do the math. See what it yields. Just keep in mind the computer is programmed and full of information.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWho is saying the significant things you'll be talking about got here by chance?? In fact, what do you mean when you say "by chance"?
[b]I assume you're leading up to the argument that since the probability of *this* universe was so unlikely then it had to be created by God.
Right now, we're just simply showing the overwhelming and profound unlikeliness that chance or randomness had anything to do with anything significant.
... tell me the odds of the resulting splodge on your ...[text shortened]... collection of shapes (down to every last molecule).
That random non-specific non-shape?[/b]
As for your last point, Yes that "random non specific non shape" What was the probability (once the splodge has been formed) that it would take that particular shape as opposed to some other shape? (again, consider there are *lots* of coffee molecules) No need to be too numerically specific btw.
Originally posted by FabianFnas1- This is science. Outside of any motivation of the initial post, this is just a stupid experiment with recorded results, hence science as far as I'm concerned, albeit fairly faulty.
Only because this is not science.
Some belives that an article with more than three numbers in it is in fact scientific. Not so.
The example of the original poster is of course about religion. I.e. not science.
2- Fairly unfair to say that just because it has to deal with spirituality, it cannot deal with science.
The connection with spirituality Freaky is supposedly trying to attest is shaky at best. I get it.
Originally posted by avalanchethecatIt's a pretty rubbish analogy anyway.
It's a pretty rubbish analogy anyway. First, there's probably something like 170 billion galaxies in the observable universe. For arguments sake, let's say 100 billion stars per galaxy.... Secondly, you're assuming it's a purely random process, which hardly a given. Chaos theory shows the propensity for order to spontaneously arise from chaotic conditions in an entirely un-random way. So.... busted.
In what regard, exactly?
First, there's probably something like 170 billion galaxies in the observable universe.
Okay, but this experiment to eke out a childishly simple sequence of otherwise meaningless letters is the equivalent of a quattuordecillion possibilities... assuming I have my zeros in the right spots.
Secondly, you're assuming it's a purely random process, which hardly a given.
Well, by all means, tell us what the source of this intelligent impetus.
Chaos theory shows the propensity for order to spontaneously arise from chaotic conditions in an entirely un-random way. So.... busted.
Very well. Describe the structure which existed in the moment that time began.
Originally posted by AgergWho is saying the significant things you'll be talking about got here by chance??
Who is saying the significant things you'll be talking about got here by chance?? In fact, what do you mean when you say "by chance"?
As for your last point, Yes that "random non specific non shape" What was the probability (once the splodge has been formed) that it would take that particular shape as opposed to some other shape? (again, consider there are *lots* of coffee molecules) No need to be too numerically specific btw.
What are the other options?
What was the probability (once the splodge has been formed) that it would take that particular shape as opposed to some other shape?
Totally quantifiable--- and predictable--- armed with the parameters of the situation, i.e., the wall's surface, humidity, trajectory of the throw, amount of liquid, distance, etc., etc., etc.. The wild card in the experiment: there was a target.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHBut your initial post shows nothing of the sort. I suspect your confusion is caused by your understanding of what 'significant' means. Perhaps you would like to elaborate what you mean by 'significant' and how significant things differ from insignificant things, and why they are more improbable.
Right now, we're just simply showing the overwhelming and profound unlikeliness that chance or randomness had anything to do with anything significant.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWell then my advice to you is not to create threats about subjects you clearly don't understand in the hope of convincing others that you know more about reality than them. It is self defeating.
"Dear Gentle Reader,
I am a Bible-believing Christian who's singular mission within this forum is to convince as many people as possible to substitute their work for the work done on their behalf on the cross by the Lord Jesus Christ. ...
If your purpose is to learn, then I have no problem, and the discussion could be fruitful, but if you hope to convince me that the thought experiment proves something about the universe other than basic probability theory, then you will not get very far, because I already know otherwise.
This might help those who what to really understand how the universe works:
There is an ongoing scientific experiment called rosetta@home.
http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/
They seek to determine the shape of proteins using computers.
They know what atoms and molecules make up a protein and what order they are connected in, but they do not know what angles they connect at.
What they do know is that the protein in nature seeks the lowest energy position.
If they were to simply randomly try out angles similar to the first post of this thread, the number of possibilities would be infinite as angles can be subdivided infinitely, but even if we were to try to be approximate, we would quickly run into the problem in the first post in that there are too many possible combinations to get anywhere significant in a reasonable amount of time.
There are several things to note here:
1. The experiment does use an awful lot of computing power (Thier worldwide super computer is currently running at about 105 TeraFLOPS)
2. They have been very successful at predicting actual protein shapes.
3. Proteins in nature solve the problem in microseconds.
It must be noted in this discussion that the universe in general does not operate by pure randomness. Anything that is directional is a non-random process. For example gravity pulls things in one specific direction. Something as simple as gravity results in sorting, rather than mixing.
All the forces of nature are directional and all of them result in organization into specific patterns. Without these non-random forces, a single atom would be so rare that it probably would never have once occurred in the known lifetime of the universe.
But randomness does play a significant role in all processes. So when Freaky says:
Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Right now, we're just simply showing the overwhelming and profound unlikeliness that chance or randomness had anything to do with anything significant.
he is clearly wrong.
What he should have said is that pure randomness does not generally lead to a specific predetermined pattern - but what else is new?