Hypography Science Forums: coldcreation - Viewing Profile - Hypography Science Forums

Well, I wasn't sure where to post this. I hesitated between the this forum and Anthropology and Cultural Studies. After all, it does have to do with the science of man (including as an object of natural history or as an animal), of the structure and functions of the human body (in art), of the origins and social relationships of human beings and their cultures (in both science and art).

It is also, perhaps, of historical interest, so here it is in the History forum.


I just posted a new blog at Blogspot.com entitled (and subtitled): State of the Modern Art World, The Essence of Cubism and its Evolution in Time.

The essay deals primarily with the historical relation (or parallel) between science and art, or Cubism more precisely.

Quote

Present in the discussion (in addition to divers artists) are the likes of Albert Einstein, Willem de Sitter, Niels Bohr, Henri Henri Poincaré, Arthur Eddington and others; scientists/mathematicians who were either influenced by, or had been influential in, the art produced at the epoch(s) under study.


If you have any question(s), I would be delighted to answer them, or at least attempt to do so...


Regards, and enjoy


Coldcreation

.


God Is a Scientific Hypothesis



The discussion that God Is a Scientific Hypothesis is an offshoot from another thread, where is was off topic.

This thread in contrast is specifically designed to get to the bottom of the question whether indeed God Is a Scientific Hypothesis. And if so [I will argue that it is] how can it be tested?


I place this thread here in the Philosophy of Science section of Hypography, as opposed to the Theology or the Astronomy and Cosmology sections, since we are concerned with the assumptions, foundations, methods and implications of science, relative to a hypothesis: the creator of the universe, or something that is operational within it. And since the origin of the universe and what transpires in it are scientific questions, so is the existence or non-existence of its supposed creator, or arbiter. This is not cosmology per say, since we are not claiming god to be a theory, but rather, a hypothesis. Nor is this a theological discussion, since we are not talking about the study of religious faith, practice, and experience, or of spirituality.



Instead of posting all of what was written on this topic in the other thread, I will simply provide the relevant hyperlinks followed by one paragraph:

In this link, it can be found what R. Dawkins (The God Delusion) writes about the god hypothesis: "Contrary to Huxley, I shall suggest that the existence of God is a scientific hypothesis like any other. Even if hard to test in practice, it belongs in the same TAP or temporary agnosticism box as the controversies over the Permian and Cretaceous extinctions. God's existence or non-existence is a scientific fact about the universe, discoverable in principle if not in practice. If he existed and chose to reveal it, God himself could clinch the argument, noisily and unequivocally, in his favour. And even if God's existence is never proved or disproved with certainty one way or the other, available evidence and reasoning may yield an estimate of probability far from 50 per cent."


Here, Boerseun provides a scientific proof that claims to falsify god hypothesis. Note: this proof still needs to be examined to test its validity: "Being Omnipotent, being all-powerful, implies having access to infinite energy. Having infinite energy implies being of infinite mass, seeing as energy and mass is one and the same thing. According to Einstein's famous equation, E=mc², the only way for E on the left to be infinite is for m on the right to be infinite - seeing as c² stays constant. "


In this post, Victor J. Stenger is quoted from his book: God: The Failed Hypothesis — How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist:

• Hypothesize a God who plays an important role in the universe.

  
  
  
• Assume that God has specific attributes that should provide objective evidence for his existence.

  
  
  
• Look for such evidence with an open mind.

  
  
  
• If such evidence is found, conclude that God may exist.

  
  
  
• If such objective evidence is not found, conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that a God with these properties does not exist.

What do you think?

Is god a hypothesis like any other?

Can god be defined in such a way as to make predictions that can be tests empirically?

And if so, once evidence is found (or if evidence is produced that disfavors the hypothesis, or not found at all) can we determine scientifically if god exists or not?




CC

Here is a list of The Catholic Church’s Latest Abuse Scandals, including those which transpired in Ireland (2,000 cases of abuse over a 60-year period), the Netherlands (nearly 200 allegations of abuse), Austria (over 20 cases of sexual abuse), Germany (at least 300 cases of abuse).

Quote

The Associated Press reports that since the mid-1990s there have been nearly 15,000 abuse cases leveled against the church, with legal claims attaining $1.5 billion.

A Vatican official acknowledges sexual abuse by up to 20,000 priests worldwide.


The above article was published March 16, 2010 (four days ago). Since then, more allegations have surfaced: Ex-teacher arrested in Chile; child sex abuse in Spain alleged. And it doesn't seem likely that allegations of pedophilia, rape and brutality within the sanctuary of the Church will stop there. Indeed, this may be only the tip of the iceberg.


Pope Benedict XVI wrote in a pastoral letter released today that he is "truly sorry" for the abuse suffered by victims at the hands of Catholic priests in Ireland. See this article.

And read Pope Benedict XVI's letter in full (pdf):

Pope Benedict XVI said:

It seems the pope's main intention with this letter is to insure the "healing, renewal and reparation" of the damage done to the church (in Ireland). The hope of the pope is that "this painful situation will be resolved swiftly". Yet he knows that is nothing but wishful thinking. The pope writes: "Real progress has been made, yet much more remains to be done. Perseverance and prayer are needed, with great trust in the healing power of God’s grace."

I doubt prayer will be of any benefit. And I distrust the healing power of God’s grace.

Pope Benedict XVI said:

The latter is an understatement. And as far as the former goes, rather than acknowledge before the Lord, it should be acknowledge before a judge ("others").

Enough with the don't ask, don't tell policy. Pedophilia, rape and brutality within the sanctuary of the Church needs to be flushed out. Get the guilty bastards away from children, behind bars where they belong; and keep them there!

Does any one second that motion?



Edit: If not, what should be done to stop these pedophiles, sexual and physical abusers?

Is the pope doing enough? If not, what should he do?

And let's not forget those that have been sexually abused. Is it time, high time, that they manifest themselves and denounce those prelate priest perpetrators (and other related perverts)?



CC

What is Entropy?



This question appears to surface quite often in various forms and in various places: always energizing considerable debate.

Here, it is stated: The equation for entropy, or the amount of disorder in a system, was formulated by the German physicist Rudolf Clausius in 1850.

Some would define entropy as a thermodynamic property, a measure (or degree) of disorder in a system. Entropy is a property defined for all states of a system. It can be assigned absolute values that must be positive (nonnegative). Entropy cannot be destroyed. It is a property of all matter. Depending on the type of system, entropy either remains the same or increases with time. In Greek, entropy means evolution. (see Second law of thermodynamics, and/or Entropy)

So far so good. But it is not at all that clear as to what exactly is entropy, especially to those unfamiliar with thermodynamics (which includes almost everyone ). Frankly, even those that are familiar with thermodynamics seem to disagree on the question of what is entropy.

Here are some thoughts and questions that may arise on the topic of entropy:





What’s do you believe entropy is (or is not) and why?



Coldcreation

Cryogenics: Ultra-Low Temperature Physics; Implications


Because the universe is thought to have never been colder than the observed 2.7 K of the microwave background radiation—an idea based on modern cosmology—it is believed that Bose-Einstein condensates, along with other phenomena that occur below 2.7 K (superfluid helium, helium-3/helium-4 phase separation, adiabatic demagnetization of paramagnetic molecules, Fermi melting point of helium-3, Bose melting point of bosonic atomic gases, etc.) exist nowhere else in the universe other than in the laboratories here on Earth.

I argue that this may be a crucial error. For example, there has been observed at least one place in the universe that is colder than 2.7 K.

][url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boomerang_nebula]The Boomerang Nebula is one of the Universe, on using the 15-metre Swedish ESO Submillimetre Telescope in Chile, astronomers revealed that it is the coldest place in the Universe found so far. With a temperature of -272 °C, it is only 1 kelvin warmer than absolute zero (the lowest limit for all temperatures). Even the -270 °C background glow from the Big Bang is warmer than this nebula. It is the only object found so far that has a temperature lower than the background radiation. [2, said:

Boomerang Nebula PGC 3074547
(Image Credit: NASA, ESA and The Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA))



A brief history:

Important contributions to physics were introduced by Einstein in 1907 regarding the application of the quantum theory to the theory of specific heats, and concerning the quantum theory of gases in 1924-25 when he completed work on a new type of statistics known as Bose-Einstein statistics in which the existence of a new state of matter (a new category of statistics) was predicted called Bose-Einstein Condensates—a remarkable phenomenon discovered only in the last few years. The implications of these fundamental ideas have not yet been fully interpreted, evaluated, developed or theoretically submitted to application in the quest to illuminate the mysteries of the large and small-scale structures of the universe.

According to the fundamental laws of quantum mechanical processes that govern conditions in the micro-universe what we usually term a particle can sometimes behave as a wave. This is well known. Waves may likewise behave as particles. This may not be as well known. L. de Broglie (1924) hypothesized the existence of matter waves and expressed their wavelength in terms of the of momentum of the particles p: where h is Planck's constant. The more slowly the particle moves the less its momentum and the longer the de Broglie wavelength. According to the kinetic theory of gases low particle (or wave) velocities correspond to low temperatures. If a sufficiently dense gas of cold atoms can be produced, the matter wavelengths of the particles will be of the same order of magnitude as the distance that separates them. It is at this point that the diverse waves of matter can 'feel' one another and co-ordinate their state. This is called Bose-Einstein condensation. It is often said that a "superatom" arises since the whole composite arrangement is described by one single wave function exactly as in a single atom. We can also speak of coherent light in the case of a laser in the same way as of coherent matter.

An Indian physicist, Bose, (in 1924) made significant theoretical calculations concerning particles of light. He sent his findings to Einstein who broadened the theory to a particular type of atom. Einstein expected that if a gas of such atoms were cooled to an extremely low temperature all the atoms would abruptly congregate in the lowest possible energy state. The development is comparable to when drops of liquid form from a gas, therefore the term condensation—or like tiny droplets of water that form on a cold window when warm air comes into contact with it (but certainly not the same).

In 1995 the 2001 Nobel Laureates succeeded in attaining this extreme state of matter, Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC). Eric A. Cornell and Carl E. Wieman then produced a pure condensate of about 2000 rubidium atoms at 20 nK (nanokelvin), i.e., 0.00000002 degrees above absolute zero. Collective excitations and vortex formations have since been observed in condensates. Manifestations of Bose-Einstein condensation have previously been observed in more complex systems: condensation of paired electrons in superconductors (where loss of all electrical resistance occurs) and superfluidity or suprafluidity (loss of internal friction in fluids); both of which manifestations occur at very low temperatures.

BEC has also been attained in the most ubiquitous element in the universe: Bose-Einstein Condensation of Atomic Hydrogen, Dale G. Fried, Thomas C. Killian, Lorenz Willmann, David Landhuis, Stephen C. Moss, Daniel Kleppner, and Thomas J. Greytak, Department of Physics and Center for Materials Science and Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139 (Received 11 September 1998).

But there is more. Due to Poincaré resonances, dynamical processes at higher temperatures also lead to long-range correlations, despite the short-range character of forces between particles—an essential fact that leads to asymmetry and permits evolutionary patterns in agreement with the thermodynamic description of nature.

The primary aim of this thread is to discuss the latest developments in the field of cryogenics (particulary below 2.7 K), in the hopes of gaining a better understanding of nature.


This frosty discourse should reveal certain alignments between the scientific stance and the artist who advocates non-objectivity: a common naturalism together with a common belief in the individual’s subjective capacity to transform appearances or concepts (particularly in cosmology). This dialogue, however, should also reveal a crucial difference. In one case, it is believed that after an intensely hot energetic phase of annihilation and separation a process began where undifferentiated matter gravitationally collapsed as the temperature of the universe drops during expansion. And the other, where that may not be the case.



“Mathematics, rightly viewed, posses not only truth, but supreme beauty; a beauty cold and austere, like that of sculpture”
(Bertrand Russell)



“Life always gets harder toward the summit - the cold increases, the responsibility increases”
(Friedrich Nietzsche)



CC