Go to Religion in the Modern World
- Add a comment
- Go to Yeah but . . . . .
Xeno-x - I cannot disagree; science can be like religion in the sense that
scientific research can be subject to the same types of bias as religion.
Human nature, human currencies and human ego can play a role in any endeavor where the individual is intent on proving something or maintaining what are perceived to be established truths. Where religion and science are different however is that in the world of science the underlying objective is to expand knowledge through discovery utilizing scientific methodology, where the objective of religion is to simply maintain what is believed as established truths. Sometimes at the cost of impeding the expansion of knowledge.
posted by
gomedome
on May 2, 2007 at 8:11 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: somebody is forgetting about a certain law discovered by Newton & Einstein
Actually, Xeno, it happened the other way around. One of the predictions of Einstein's equations is that the Universe should be filled with the remnants of the energy produced at the Big Bang, and that this energy should be in the microwave region. Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson were running a completely unrelated experiment in 1965, and simply couldn't get rid of some residual microwave "noise." No matter what they did, they simply couldn't get rid of it. At the same time Robert Dicke and James Peebles were rethinking some of George Gamow's old calculations that had indicated back in the 1940s that such a background radiation "should" be present, if only we could measure it (impossible back then). Somebody put Penzias and Wilson together with Dicke and Peebles, and voilà, they had their explanation for this mysterious noise. They were awarded the Nobel Prize for this discovery in 1978.
posted by
arGee
on May 2, 2007 at 7:47 AM
| link to this | reply
one more thing -- science can be like religion and embarrass itself
when it refuses to accept new possible explanations
posted by
Xeno-x
on May 2, 2007 at 7:42 AM
| link to this | reply
continuation -- sorry batteries went out on keyboard
the idea of everything coming from that Singularity is a sexy theory; there is evidence pointing to its possibility.
and yet this is an event that occured so beyond human perception and discovery that the exact event will never be known.
an alternative explanation might surface if science will not be like religion and not be open to possibilities.
and yet -- the matter is -- matter has always existed.
it didn't come out of nothing.
but to know the history of matter beyond a few billion years -- well, that is not all that possible as far as I can comprehend.
heck, science still is being surprised by Dark Matter and Black Holes and other phenomena that no one had a conception of a few decades ago.
posted by
Xeno-x
on May 2, 2007 at 7:41 AM
| link to this | reply
Back in 1994, Gome...
Michio Kaku wrote a wonderful book,
Hyperspace: A Scientific Odyssey Through Parallel Universes, Time Warps, and the 10th Dimension, wherein he discusses, among other things Superstring Theory and the Big Bang. Since the book is over ten years old, some of the material has changed, but within the context of your discussion, the book is right on point and very much worth reading.
posted by
arGee
on May 2, 2007 at 7:37 AM
| link to this | reply
somebody is forgetting about a certain law discovered by Newton & Einstein
CONSERVATION OF MATTER AND ENERGY
click here for various links
My understanding from just glacing at these links is that Newton first formulated that basically there can be no loss of matter.
Einstein then added to it and came up with E=MC2, where mass was changed into energy in a nuclear reaction.
The Big Bang Theory derives from for one thing astronomers discovering this "noise" throughout the known Universe and the expansion of same, then concluded that all came from this Singularity.
However, this is simply extrapolation of perceived events based on what is known. There is a lot remaining unknown. That Singularity might never have existed. It is a sexy
posted by
Xeno-x
on May 2, 2007 at 7:34 AM
| link to this | reply