A metaphysical explanation is more than giving efficient (and final) causes: it is
more than physics.
As it happened, I found that I generally enjoyed courses in math
more than physics; consequently I focussed much more on math in my final 2 years.
Every time I walk into these freakish, localized gales, springing up while a block away there was nary a breeze, it seems like
more than physics is at work.
In fact some games are little
more than physics playgrounds, like the popular Source - based Garry's Mod.
Not exact matches
«We have 25 Ph.D. scientists working on the project,
more than some entire
physics departments at major universities,» he says.
But the inventor who had first caught Fortune's eye
more than two decades earlier was someone else: a rebellious
physics genius, not yet 30, who «never took the trouble to graduate from Harvard» and who had started a small company in a cellar on Boston's Dartmouth Street.
More than a decade before he started Tesla, Musk was studying
physics at the University of Pennsylvania and then battery technology at Stanford, both key fields for learning how to build an electric car.
That lab complements the Institute for Quantum Computing and the
more -
than - decade - old Perimeter Institute for Theoretical
Physics, both founded with
more than $ 250 million of Lazaridis's own money and additional funds he helped raise.
General Fusion's team of
more than 50 scientists and engineers are world leaders in fusion technology, with expertise across plasma
physics, computer simulation and engineering.
If you require atheists to explain something
physics directly tells you we can't talk about right now, your burden of proof for atheism is oddly far
more extreme
than your burden of proof for «god».
By education, I mean one can not learn
physics or engineering from a blog any
more than an entire theology.
Paul Dirac, one of the giants of twentieth - century
physics, went so far as to say that it was
more important to have «beauty in one's equations»
than to have them fit the experimental data.
More recent biology and
physics have replaced this view with one that asserts that the physical world is composed of energy rather
than passive matter.
For
more than a century now economics has been advanced and practiced as a science, on the model of
physics and mathematics.
Such a notion as emergence, for example, which is closely allied with the principle of indeterminacy and uncertainty and which was later to develop in
physics, actually assumed
more credence in
physics before it took root in biology and psychology; yet it has
more significant implications for the data of the organic and social sciences
than for
physics.
One needs the corrective of Bergson and James at times in reading Whitehead, however, lest the formative notions of the new
physics implicit in his imagery render one's understanding of this creative nexus
more external and rationalistic
than it actually can be.
However, Whitehead was brought to his metaphysics of relations through the revolution in the new
physics; this fact has given to his thought, in designating the nexus of events,
more externality
than he really means to convey, or should imply.
Or, as he put it with his penchant for startling comparisons: «A priest from Thebes would probably have felt
more at home at the Council of Trent two thousand years after Thebes had vanished
than Sir Isaac Newton at a modem undergraduate
physics society.»
Not even the cosmologists have recovered from the surprise and what it means for cosmology as regards the
more interesting
physics (rather
than once
more showing magic ideas for a scam), I'm sure.
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.
Wrote
more papers on theology
than he did on
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.
Because they have an unyielding desire to study and learn
more about our world and they know there is a LOT
more to
physics than what we currently understand.
For at least 3,000 years, the answer has been that there is «
more» to the universe
than just the
physics and chemistry of the universe.
Even with a BSC in
physics I often feel inadequate discussing
physics with anyone who has had
more than two or three years of grad - level schooling on the subject.
Ahh, also Hawking knows a LOT
more about
physics than you do, or I do, and when YOU get to be the Lucasian Professor, then you can say he's a joke.
But on the actual subject matter of theology it has no
more right to pontificate
than it has about
physics, and it makes no difference whether the philosophy be existentialism or naturalism or idealism or materialism.
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.
There is now an emerging suspicion that the universe is much
more amicable toward life and consciousness
than we would ever have thought before the advent of twentieth - century
physics and astronomy.
In fact,
physics now resembles metaphysics
more than anything else, with its theories to explain how realities unobservable by us produce the visible world.
Understanding the world is even
more remote from philosophy
than from
physics.
And sometimes it seems there is
more room for wonder, mystery, grandeur, delight, beauty, and reverence in astro -
physics than in religion.
More than this, he was sensitive to the fact that the writing of philosophy's history can be at once technically competent and narrow He praised the «philosophical greatness achieved in American philosophy, from Peirce to Santayana, but he complained of the cultural chauvinism in failing to recognize it.5 According to Hartshorne, «One might about as easily reach great heights in philosophy without benefit of the work done in modern America as to reach them in
physics without using the work of modern Germans» (Creativity 11).
question are much
more likely to be found in Einstein's equations, quantum
physics, large particle accelerators and radio telescopes
than in Genesis Chapters 1 through 20.
But one can hardly dispute that Whitehead has engaged
more fully
than any other in the engagement with recent
physics.
To that extent the formula
more or less fits
physics and biology, though to different degrees, but
more than it does philosophy and other branches of inquiry which directly concern man as a whole, in his totality.
No two men are
more significant in the history of
physics, or assume
more prominent positions in introductory courses,
than Galileo and Newton.
This idea is certainly fantastic, although no
more so
than many that have been made commonplace by modern
physics.
Newton himself was
more interested in alchemy
than physics.
Birch and Cobb maintain that the ecological model is
more adequate
than the mechanical model for explaining DNA, the cell, other biological subject matter (as well as subatomic
physics), because it holds that living things behave as they do only in interaction with other things which constitute their environment (LL 83) and because «the constituent elements of the structure at each level (of an organism) operate in patterns of interconnectedness which are not mechanical» (LL 83).
The leading edge of astronomy and theoretical particle
physics has called into question the fundamental scientific premise that Everything Can Be Explained, and
more than a few scientists have murmured the word «God» out of the corners of their mouths.
For example, the laws applying to living cells are less predictive
than the laws of
physics and chemistry The laws discoverable about multicelled life are even
more distant from the (deterministic) ideal of complete predictability.
We feel the answers to such a question are much
more likely to be found in Einstein's equations, quantum
physics, large particle accelerators and radio telescopes
than in Genesis Chapters 1 through 20.
It is arguable that, had Einstein known a metaphysics
more favorable to quantum
physics than the Spinozism and other similar doctrines influencing him, he might not have spent the latter decades of his life vainly attempting to recover the absolute «incarnate reason» of classical causality which had been made irrelevant by twentieth - century discoveries, including his own.
@Godpot... (God — pot... I'll have to try that... seems Dad has been holding back...) and that Moses character... I'll wager there was
more than just a bush burnin» up there... (wouldn't know... me and that bird were trying to figure out the
physics of stuffing «God» into a human womb right about that time... I'm thinking all these characters, not just me, were a bit «touched» as my child «Reality» likes to say...: 0)
Davies (1984) says: «The new
physics and the new cosmology reveal that an ordered universe is
more than a gigantic accident» (p. 9).
In this talk I shall, however, describe in general terms how the quantum theory, understood somewhat
more imaginatively
than is usually done, can point to a new order in
physics, which I call the enfolded order, or the implicate order.
Seems like quantum
physics has
more than its share of theories.
We know about it
more through philosophical inference and through drawing out important implications from recent
physics than by way of direct experience.
Peirce's phrase «the logic of events» points forward to contemporary
physics and Whitehead, as much as, if not
more than, back to Aristotle or other pre-quantum thinkers.