• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Bill O'Reily challenges scientest to explain how moon got there...

"God always was and always will be".

Isn't that much simpler than all that hard sciency stuff?

Not really. "God always was and always will be" is very difficult to understand. To understand that, you actually have to avoid thinking about it.

That which has a present, must have a beginning, else the present moment could never arrive. If there is no beginning, then the journey to the present moment is infinitely long, so you end up with an infinity which cannot be spanned.

Oops. I thought about it. Now I'm very dumfuzzled.

But Christians found a way to cure accidental thinking about that by substituting Aternity for Eternity. God hasn't existed forever, He simply exists in a timeless state in which anything related to a passage of time is meaningless. Again, it is necessary not to think about it.

This timeless God doesn't think or do anything, because thinking and doing things requires change, which is definitively prohibited in a timeless state. He just "knows". And He doesn't need to do anything because it's all already done, obviously, because nothing can actually happen in a timeless state. I don't exactly see how that makes Him the Creator, just sitting there knowing everything that already is. But I don't think the Christians have figured that out.
 
So, how did the moon get there? :boxedin:

The Earth naively feed the moon one day as it strayed into a periodic orbit and it never left. Which goes to show you that you should never feed a stray planetoid.

Do it too often and you can wind up to become one of those wierd lonely planets with a crap load of moons. I mean just look at Saturn. What a pathetic planet. Really should get a life.
 
"Magnets, how do they &$^%ing work?'

Actually, that's a pretty good question: just what IS a magnetic field? Wh can measure it, we can map it, but what is it?
 
Actually, that's a pretty good question: just what IS a magnetic field? Wh can measure it, we can map it, but what is it?

No, it's a terrible question. "What's an atom?" "What's a proton?" "What's a quark?"

Those are particles. One can intuitively grasp the concept of a particle, but a magnetic filed is not a particle.

It is a form of energy, or rather a component of energy, but what is it? Is it a particle? is it a wave?

What is an electron's spin?
 
What is an electron's spin?

It's a property of the electron.


There is no better explanation than that, at least no intuitive one (I think it can be likened to spinning in the fourth spatial dimension, or something like that). In Feynman's words (paraphrased), asking how or where is fine, but what and why aren't really going to get you very far.
 
I have to give Bill some praise for his going after Glenn Beck over Beck's insane Conspiracy Theories about Egypt.
 
That which has a present, must have a beginning, else the present moment could never arrive. If there is no beginning, then the journey to the present moment is infinitely long, so you end up with an infinity which cannot be spanned.

No. You are making a classic mistake akin to Zeno's paradox.

[/derail]
 
Those are particles. One can intuitively grasp the concept of a particle, but a magnetic filed is not a particle.

Actually, there is a way to express magnetic fields in terms of particles - they are called photons, and they mediate the electromagnetic force.

It is a form of energy, or rather a component of energy, but what is it? Is it a particle? is it a wave?

Magnetic fields can be modeled in a variety of ways, and yes they do carry energy.

What is an electron's spin?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_spin
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom