Sentences with phrase «known physics in»

Fischbach is the epitome of the curious soul, constantly poking around at the edges of known physics in search of something that other people overlooked: a fifth force of nature, for instance, or a flaw in Einstein's theory of relativity.

A few people here don't know their physics in regard to this thread and where the calculus must take you.

Not exact matches

«I said that I had had a course in physics and knew that E equaled IR,» she recalled, referring to Ohm's law.

Unless you majored in physics or read obscure journals, you probably didn't know that.

Lithium is a known quantity to chemists, says Carlo Segre, professor of physics at the Illinois Institute of Technology in Chicago, and we mostly understand how it flows inside a battery.

Jaden and Willow Smith, two of his three kids (one is from a previous marriage), have a reputation for being deeply philosophical in their interviews, known to talk about quantum physics and energy in the air.

Bech Nielsen of the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen and Masao Ninomiya of the Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics in Kyoto have postulated that future civilizations simply don't want the nature of Higgs boson to be revealed for reasons we apparently will never know.

Atheists: I know many there are many people that practice religion just by fanaticism, I've seen many people in my opinion stupid (excuse the word) praying to saints hopping to solve their problems by repeating pre-made sentences over and over, but there are others different, I don't think Religion and Science need to be opposites, I believe in God, I'm Catholic and I have many reasons to believe in him, I don't think however that we should pray instead of looking for the cause and applying a solution, Atheists think they are smart because they focus on Science and technology instead of putting their faith in a God, I don't think God will solve our problems, i think he gave us the means to solve them by ourselves that's were God is, also I think that God created everything but not as a Magical thing but stablishing certain rules like Physics and Quimics etc. he's not an idiot and he knew how to make it so everything was on balance, he's the Scientist of Scientist the Mathematic of Mathematics, the Physician of Physicians, from the tiny little fact that a mosquito, an insect species needs to feed from blood from a completely different species, who created the mosquitos that way?

I agree with the big bang guy... if we talk about proof... let's first figure where we all came from... we have all heard this «Well we know what happened after the big bang... but have no clue what came before» well first figure that out... and if you can't in the next 20 years then there has to be something beyond Physics...

That is, if we had souls they would not likely be «supernatural» or extra-dimensional since we see absolutely NO evidence of anything like that in physics at all.

Also, I never proposed that randomness created anything (I only argued that some simple set of laws of physics are all that need be behind the designs of nature that we observe), so I don't know why you are going on about randomness in your last few sentences.

It can not be done in a lab with everything we know about chemistry and physics and yet it supposedly occurred randomly in nature without even the slightest directed intelligence.

In fact if they knew anything about science, and Cell Biology, (to say nothing of Physics and Chemistry), it is the FARTHEST thing from that.

Or in the academic realm, it's like knowing up - front if the writer has a Ph.D. in physics, or math, or religion, or philosophy, or the philosophy of science or the philosophy of religion.

In fact, the real values of most parameters, and the physics of how they affect the earth's climate, are in most cases only roughly known, too roughly to supply accurate enough data for computer predictionIn fact, the real values of most parameters, and the physics of how they affect the earth's climate, are in most cases only roughly known, too roughly to supply accurate enough data for computer predictionin most cases only roughly known, too roughly to supply accurate enough data for computer predictions.

The new physics no longer pictures the universe in terms of bits and pieces called particles.

In all honesty probably.04 % or less of the human population really understands Quantum Physics on a basic level, yet when someone claims to know it people agree with whatever they say as fact.

``... the future of Christian philosophy will therefore depend on the existence or absence of theologians equipped with scientific training, no doubt limited but genuine and, within its own limits, sufficient for them to follow with understanding such lofty dialogues not only in mathematics and physics but also in biology and wherever the knowledge of nature reaches the level of demonstration.»

Nonsuch and guest, We could get into the differences in same you - know - what unions and marriage but said discussion uses the physics and biology of the situations and this somehow offends the moderators of this blog.

This understanding of God's relationship to the world has been enormously influential in contemporary philosophy of religion, especially since the publication in 1948 of The Divine Relativity from which the above quotation was taken.2 Although the consistency of divine relativity with the understanding of simultaneity in modem physics is a recognized point of contention, the question I wish to ask is whether the theory of divine relativity is metaphysically possible.3 How could it be possible for God to know and feel the different experiences of radically distinct subjects with equal vividness all at the same time?

In classical physics from the spot P we infer the position of atom A. From the spot P, the track PP1, and from knowledge of how the lens works, we could also know the momentum of the particle.

Changes of clocks and rulers were already well known in physics due to temperature and pressure and so on.

A few years ago a documentary movie about quantum physics summed up the totality of our knowledge in its title: What the Bleep Do We Know?

Isn't it amazing thinking, physics and mechanics work, but there is no design, just random happenstance... Takes more faith to believe in evolution than that God actually created the world we know.

Whitehead, another mathematician - physicist - philosopher, had a similar view Thus our theological scheme is no longer as seriously at odds with science or the philosophy of science as it was in the days of classical or Newtonian physics.

Evolution has more holes than cheese, when you ask questions like, how did this happen in spite of the laws of physics, the answer is I do not know.

It is interesting that there is nothing we know of that precludes different laws of physics in other universes.

Physics - lite @ CN77 & Andrew Andrew's Quote «It's not all that pointless, see while you would never be convinced that your bronze age mythological beliefs about the creation of the universe are wrong, since I can rebut (with peer reviewed journal articles no less) any claim you make, in rather stunning detail, those who are not so well versed on the subject who read the dialogue could be swayed to the side of science.

I am not claiming you are elitist... but at the same time... you should know better... not every Christian is equipped to handle deep theological questioning, in the same way that not every atheist can give a dissertation on quantum physics.

He can not distinguish questions regarding the existence of the universe from questions regarding its physical origin; he does not grasp how assertions regarding the absolute must logically differ from assertions regarding contingent beings; he does not know the differences between truths of reason and empirical facts; he has no concept of ontology, in contradistinction to, say, physics or evolutionary biology; he does not understand how assertions regarding transcendental perfections differ from assertions regarding maximum magnitude; he clumsily imagines that the idea of God is susceptible to the same argument from infinite regress traditionally advanced against materialism; he does not understand what the metaphysical concept of simplicity entails; and on and on.

Tell your children that if the truly wish to know about the world and the universe then they need to immerse themselves in Physics, Biology, Chemestry, and Mathematics.

Atheists can prove that science exists, that the earth is more than 6000 years old, that their is NO WAY to build the size ark that Noah built and do what is claimed in the bible, again when making extraordinary claims, we need evidence and we know that snakes do not talk, that the laws of physics can not be suspended and that nearly EVERY claim in the bible is false.

They have challenged the notion that the Biblical writers were men of their times in respect to history, cosmology, and physics, who wrote what they believed to be true but what is now known to be false.

I have briefly noted some aspects of modern physics, medicine, and parapsychology to point to what you probably already knew: there is nothing in our modern common sense itself which rules out our consideration of a spiritual reality.

Speaking of «truth [being] made manifest in many different ways, including in creation itself» (me), and contrary to fishon's idea that a world of facts is «sterile», anyone know anything about quantum physics?

In fact, he still does — though it has already been transformed and resurrected and is therefore no longer subject to the ordinary laws of our physics, which govern only mortal bodies and material objects.

And since the «heat shield» was made up of what NASA called «special plastic» back in the day, and since NASA indeed stated that reentry from such a voyage generates temperatures «10 times hotter than the sun», then we can know that one would burn - up upon reentry as do meteors and true physics confirms.

I know this sounds mean, but it's not very different from a television news reader writing a paper in American Journal of Physics.

In the early days of what we know as modern science, the hard sciences — physics, chemistry, astronomy — were thought to be (and often thought themselves) the enemies of revelation and biblical religion.

Not only their specific results in analyzing motion and force but also their methods of investigation make them the founders of physics as we know it today.

In the 19th century mechanistic physics developed into a rational determinism, Darwin contradicted not only the Bible but also Aristotelian natures, which, known through abstraction, should remain always the same.

Life and consciousness are no longer chance anomalies in Nature; rather we find in biology a complement to the physics of matter.

Second, most evolutionary biologists agree that you can not know evolution without a basic foundation in history, geology, biology and physics.

So of course the real problem of life is not that all the structures and molecules in the cell appear to comply with the known laws of physics and chemistry.

Your telling me, that given these FACTS that we know are true, a magic being called God chose to suspend the laws of physics and human biology about 2000 years ago to let us know he's here and never hear from him again or find any signs of his existance in the know Universe exept that book that you keep pulling nonsense quotes from?

Apparently he said to himself, «Now how does the problem of chance and necessity look in the light of the physics I know?»

For to anticipate at once: the «subject of doubt» does not lie for us in Whitehead's concept of an «actual entity» so much as in his exclusive identification of «actual entities» with [252] ultimate atomic event - units, even beyond the smallest units known to us in physics.

But as indicated above, it does not fit with what we now know in physics.

Sue, since you have a doctorate in Physics (would love to know who was on your dissertation board) please explain to Richard (the one that keeps cheerleading with no valuable inputs of his own) how Hawking's calculation of monkey's eventually typing out a Shakespear sonnet would take a prohibitive time — longer than the known universe and longer than the universe would last... hint you can google it too

One is a managing director of a major Southern Bank, one is an attorney, one has a PhD in Physics from Stanford and one is a Captain in the U.S. States Marine Corps, the second woman ever to pilot the attack helicopter known as the Cobra.