Eco-friendly polymers strong enough for use in cars and airplanes
When research chemist Janet Garcia found a lump of white substance the size of a candy bar in one of the vials she had used some time earlier, she had no idea what she had created. The substance stuck firmly to the glass and she had to smash the bottle with a hammer to get the lump out. But when she hit the material itself with a hammer it refused to crack. "When I realized how strong it was, I knew I had to understand what it was made of," says Garcia.
Garcia, a scientist at the IBM Research Center in Alameda, California, enlisted the help of several colleagues to solve the puzzle. They found that she had stumbled upon a new family of thermoset polymers, which are exceptionally strong plastic materials used in products ranging from smartphones to airplane wings. About a third of the polymers produced in the world each year are thermoset polymers, but it is difficult to recycle them. Garcia's new material, called Titan, is the world's first discovered thermoplastic polymer that is both industrially strong and recyclable.
Unlike other thermosets, which are very difficult to cast in a new mold, the new polymer can be processed through a chemical reaction. Garcia and her colleagues reported the new discovery in May 2014 in the journal Science.
The global demand for durable and recyclable plastic materials is expected to increase soon. In 2015, for example, Europe and Japan will require by law that 95% of the car parts produced there be recyclable. "This is a perfect example of a material that would be suitable for exactly that purpose," says Garcia. But she believes that the new thermostat will eventually be used in a variety of applications: coatings against chemical weathering and bacteria, carrying medicines, adhesives, XNUMXD printing, water purification, and more.
Titan also came with a welcome addition. Garcia and her colleagues discovered another type of this material, which they called hydro, which forms at lower temperatures. This gel-like substance has the ability to repair itself. "If you cut it in half and stick the halves together, they immediately form chemical bonds," says Garcia. The material may be used as an adhesive or self-healing paint. In the future there may be more similar materials. "It's not just this one new polymer, but a new polymerization reaction," she says.
The article was published with the permission of Scientific American Israel
695 תגובות
Miracles
What are you arguing with a box for? It's a waste of effort. He does live in a box and he belongs to those who interpret into the Bible and the result is the words of Abel. There is indeed a method of interpreting the Bible - the sermon - which is used in this way, but these are wise people and do not cause the Bible to be vilified. A box is just the opposite. It doesn't seem to me that he is that well versed in the mechanics of Judaism
Out of the box,
We haven't heard your voice in a long time, is everything alright?
box.
You're drifting away from reality again. We know that life expectancy has increased over the years, thanks to scientists. There is no evidence that in the past life expectancy was higher than today - to claim otherwise is simply a lie!!!
And if you think that string theory is described in the Torah, then you are also a fool.
Don't expect me to respect you, when you talk such nonsense. Believe what you want, but don't get into discussions if people are open minded.
I already told you - you will only be hurt by it. Do not try to eat from the "tree of knowledge" again...
Out of the box, even before the industrial revolution and all the pollution you talk about life expectancy was still around 35-40.
Instead of realizing that you are clinging to a book of fairy tales and chisbets, you try to convince us (and maybe yourself too) that what is described there happened in reality.
box,
I really don't understand what you are talking about. Your example is strange and confusing between past and future. What is the connection between your claim about the past and the fact that we may still succeed with scientific technological means, which have nothing to do with religion in general and Judaism in particular?
By the way, are you claiming that there used to be a lifespan of hundreds of years? I'm not sure I understood you. If so, then prove it. Can you give me a reference to a scientific article in a peer-reviewed scientific journal that agrees with your claim? The Torah is not a reference because you are probably deriving this claim from it, therefore in order to be able to confirm the claim that comes from the Torah, you need an external source.
Also, who disparaged your claim? Give names.
Is asking for confirmation of your claim by a scientific authority considered disrespectful on my part?
Outside the box, the long life span you are talking about should be possible in the future with the help of sophisticated medical technology that is starting to develop today and is expected to develop much more in the coming decades, this is a technology that did not exist in any way in the ancient period that you are talking about, therefore to say that people once lived 700 and 900 years is indeed ridiculous.
Instead of realizing that your "holy" book is nothing more than a fairy tale, you insist in your naivety that it represents a real reality that once existed on Earth.
Tol Kora is happening before your eyes, or in other words - grow up already.
Shmulik
I entered a website that tries to calculate my life expectancy by filling out a questionnaire. I filled in the most suitable answers and came to the estimate that I will live to 107.5. They did not calculate the reality of a world pure and purified from pollution. Balanced weather exactly according to the needs of the lake and many more things that were in the first millennium of creation. In common sense it is understood that there is no doubt that the life expectancy back then was extremely high
Shmulik
Here is a link that describes science's opinion regarding the origin of life in the first millennium of creation a little less than five thousand years ago. Of course, due to this opinion, I have encountered disparaging comments more than once. for a lifespan of several hundred years.
Today, scientists believe that they can achieve a lifespan of several hundred years, and there are those who talk about eternal life
https://he.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%AA%D7%95%D7%97%D7%9C%D7%AA_%D7%97%D7%99%D7%99%D7%9D
box,
I did not understand. You make a claim and then send me to find out its correctness?
If you admit you made a claim you can't stand behind, why are you sending me to find evidence for it?
If you have names, write them, if not, do not write this claim anymore. promising?
Miracles
I forgot another detail does it sound absurd reality of resurrection.
And as they say, "From the source for the resurrection of the dead from the Torah that says "Then Moshe will sing" then sing and not then sing
Miracles
Today, eternal life also has a place in the reasoning of scientists
Shmulik
Science itself in its purity does not and cannot underestimate, I agree with you. But those who supposedly represent science. tend to insert their limited opinions in order to disparage.
Shmulik
For example
When a Jew says there is a Creator. And they answer him that the disciplinary statement is delusional, imagination, legend, stupidity.
You want to find that a viewer will go through the comments and you will find.
If you want to find names of people who spoke the same way 40 years ago about longevity up to hundreds of years
Sorry. I don't have the names.
This time you will have to find out elsewhere
For example, older scientists in the sixties
box,
Your last sentence is completely incomprehensible. Science underestimated what? Science is not a man or a woman but a method, so I don't understand how science can underestimate something.
If you mean that people disrespected something the Torah said, can you write what they disrespected and mention names of people who disrespected it or you can just throw words around because you feel like it?
Miracles
Another detail that the Torah said and science despised today is acceptable.
The length of life mentioned in Genesis is accepted as arbitrary
box.
You say that the brain, according to the Torah, receives signals beyond the limits of physics. So maybe we'll do an experiment to see if it's true?
What experiment do you suggest?
box.
Remind me - where are strings mentioned in the Torah?
Miracles
I did think that your aim was to strike... and that you were asking seriously.
It is clear to you that I do not know the entire Torah and I do not pretend to be so.
But I did tell you one thing. that the process that science goes through inevitably leads eventually to the recognition of the reality of the Creator of the world.
For example string theory. Describes a harmonious state of oscillations that exists in the universe.. Speech is also included in the harmony of frequencies.. as for example, God will say, Let there be light.. And God will say, let there be sky, etc.
All the theories are advanced to fulfill the promise of the creator of the world to Jacob our father. Even if they reach the throne of honor, from there I will send them the speech of God.
This thing is already written in the Torah and that is where science is marching.. When it is discovered by the scientists or then you will see that it is written in the Torah.
The point is that they want to explore in a slow process without referring to writing..
Another example written in the Torah regarding the brain, that the brain is not only an instrument and a tool that produces thoughts. And transmitting data to the body is also a device for receiving data beyond the boundaries of the body and matter.
Here I told you two things written in the Torah, go out and learn
outside the box.
Pay attention to what you said... "I will learn about the brain and then I will see where it is written in the Torah". In the same way, I can find a game binding story cell in "Moby Dick".
To show that the Torah has knowledge, find me something in the Torah about the brain that we don't know. So - if scientists verify the finding, we will know that there really is something in this book.
I don't expect you to do that, but I would expect a believing neuroscientist to succeed.
Yogi Bera once said that predicting the past is not difficult...
Miracles
I don't know if you were serious about asking where it is in the Torah.
Assuming this is a relevant question. I would love to know what exactly. Where is a device like this found in the Torah or where are all the details of the structure of the brain mentioned in the Torah. or both.
It is clear to you that in order to answer the answer you will tell me I must study. the subject as it is expressed .. i.e. to study the details of the structure of the brain starting from the encompassing skull including if I am not mistaken fluid etc. Brain division and more details. Then I will have to find the parallel in the Torah.. Such a thing takes some time and it is a challenge, but if you are serious I will take on this challenge as well. In addition to the book that Riv referred me to and as you know it takes time. Whatever I don't understand I will ask you
Israel
Good week and good month
True, unfortunately I also suffer from the same drawback of the revelation of the Creator of the world. Anyway in the way I want it to be revealed. But such a revelation has already been made. And I believe in it, see XNUMX Principles of Faith to the Herambam
Likewise, the complete redemption which is also part of those XNUMX principals will be such a revelation of and see every flesh. That is, all the people in the world. I hope it will be today
Sabi
You can say that about any successful series.
But I am mostly enthusiastic about the language.
"How heroes fell, and weapons of war were lost."
"Where have you been, Bisdi-Eretz; Hegde, if you knew her."
"The amount of love is fierce and as hard as hell, jealousy, tears, tears of fire"
Israel Shapira, why die so much for the Bible? A book full of horror stories, fairy tales and immoral things, I really don't understand you.
Copsey
I don't worship physics, and I have no problem with the boss.
Furthermore, I also believe that the boss has no problem with his servant Israel, who fulfills commandments 6-10 and does not covet his neighbor's donkey.
My problem with him - and I mentioned it to him more than once - is the lack of proof of its existence. Something small like a light and sound show in Rabin Square, or some kind sign or example.
Even solving the Goldbach conjecture on his Facebook page could be considered a constructive training step.
On the other hand, I will never send him and his believers, most of whom I know are nice and honest people.
Except that I love the Bible.
Savi Maranan and Shabbat rest.
Miracles
I'll try to sneak in the unruly response:
In my understanding, the time of a specific satellite clock is transmitted to receivers at fixed intervals.
I need to know the arrival time of such a signal to the GPS receiver, according to the receiver's clock, with an accuracy of nanoseconds.
Any other signal is also possible, but it must come from the satellite, not from a ground station, and be specific. The goal is that I can compare the arrival times of the same signal to two nearby receivers.
Miracles
Thank you
Really interesting
Shabbat Shalom
And a good month
box.
Yes - the system shows the contents, not the envelope. The source of the information is volumetric scans such as CT and MRI. These scans create a series of images. Let's assume that each image has a resolution of a millimeter, and that the distance between each pair of images is also a millimeter. That is, the images constitute slices of the brain (or any other part), and we build a three-dimensional cube from this, which is made up of small cubes of a millimeter on each side.
Now - instead of flat pixels, we have voxels with volume. In CT, the value of each voxel represents the tissue density, say between 0 for air and 1000 for dense bone. We do two things. The first is to divide this domain into parts, so that each part represents a different tissue type, for example, bone, blood vessels, gray matter, also and water.
The second thing is to add transparency that depends on this density. That way, you can make sure that they see, for example, only a skull and blood vessels.
In MRI it is similar, but more complex. There are several types of MRI scans, and in some types the value in each voxel is not a number - it is a tensor. A tensor, in this case, is a series of 6 numbers, which express the flow of water molecules at each point. From this information it is possible to derive routes of information flow in the brain.
All this must be mentioned in the Torah, isn't it? 🙂
Father, can the response be released on bail?
Thanks.
Ariel.
I was sent to read a whole book. I'm sending you to read something much shorter http://www.nosachteiman.co.il/?CategoryID=563&ArticleID=759
Ariel
Before you is a small excerpt from the letter of Rambam's Yemen. The answer to your question appears there at length.
Know this is the true teachings of God given to us by the Lord of all the first and last prophets. In this Torah, the Creator distinguished us from the rest of the people of the world as it is said (Deuteronomy XNUMX:XNUMX) Only in your ancestors did God desire to love them and He will choose their seed after them among you of all peoples in this day. And it is not according to the fact that we deserved it, but by the grace and goodness of the Creator who was kind to us and did us good because our ancestors were preceded by good deeds in the knowledge and work of the Creator. As it is said (Deuteronomy XNUMX:XNUMX) not from most of you of all the peoples, the Lord desired this and finished. And because the Creator has united us in His mitzvos and laws and the clarification of our superiority over others in His rules and judgments, as it is said (Deut. To fight God and make a quarrel with Him, and He is God and who will fight Him. And you don't have a time since the Torah gave us until our time that every king of Akum overcomes or forces or overcomes or rapes without the beginning of his intention and opinion to contradict the Torah.
Box, regarding your response to the worship of science, you try to ridicule science but you forget that Judaism does the same thing (the same applies to most religions). If you think worshiping something is ridiculous, why is Judaism an exception?
On the same subject, you tell me and convince me that God exists, why should I not turn to Christianity or Islam? Is there something unique to Judaism? After all, the other religions also have the same characteristics, they are more modern and even have many more believers.
Miracles
a question
If I understood correctly about the system you built. Unlike Maya and other 3D programs, did you mean that the software actually deals not only with the shell but also with the interior?
Israel
In India there is a statue called Buddha.
It's time for physics worshipers to make a statue of their own. A huge transparent ball with electric sparks came. Something in style. Every year they will have a global meeting around the ball and shout physics!!! Physics??
The politicians of the physics sect will stand there. Etc. etc
Miracles
There are indeed many things that humans have improved in God. I do not dispute whether the source of this is laws that the Torah was given to the world.. because even according to the Torah before the giving of the Torah there was a reality of "Seven mitzvot of the sons of Noah" (Google and its partner Wiki can help those who are not familiar with them.)
I definitely agree with you that humans are correcting themselves more and more. Unfortunately, a large part of them learned about the meat. They could have saved a lot for their benefit... but the choice was not taken. And more than that, the world is so corrected because it is the world ready for redemption. That is, to the revelation of the King of kings in the form of "and they saw all flesh".
You should and it is recommended to read Harari's book. The history of the future. He details the process in a wonderful way. Only with one misstep.
But that too will come with time
ו
Response in the clothing.
OK, before going to sleep, here's the bottom line of what I need:
In my understanding, the time of a specific satellite clock is transmitted to receivers at fixed intervals.
I need to know the arrival time of such a signal to the GPS receiver, according to the receiver's clock, with an accuracy of nanoseconds.
Any other signal is also possible, but it must come from the satellite, not from a ground station, and be specific. The goal is that I can compare the arrival times of the same signal to two nearby receivers.
thank you and good night.
There is always time…. Knowledge is something else 🙂
Out of the box.
The world today is much, much less violent than it used to be. There are fewer wars, fewer crimes and fewer diseases. Religion held man back, but today the world is breaking free from it. Today what is important is the sanctity of life, and not the sanctity of God, or the sanctity of Allah, or in Raman or....
There are many good things that have come out of religion, but you don't have to wrap it up in all the nonsense you believe in. In your eyes - man is God's toy, and woman is even less than that.
Think about your entire faith being based on a book full of horror stories, borrowed mythology, and scientific errors that describe a world we've known for years doesn't exist. And this book - they've been making excuses for 2000 years, and it's only getting more and more ridiculous... Just yesterday I saw "Elevator Shabbat"... And next to it are stairs with the sign "Shabbat Stairs"... what is happening to you 🙂
copse,
Yes, but isn't my life bounded by the laws of physics?
Miracles
Contact us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/ronit.shapira
Do you have some time for questions about GPS satellites or are you too busy with matters above?
Oh, GPS satellites are also top notch..
Israel
Has he done this before? or will do so in the future. Or it is found we just can't find it yet. Whether we discovered it already in the morning. And they immediately silenced the revelation. Because they simply cannot accept it
(As I have heard that the mind hides things from us that we have not seen before, perhaps Nishim understands better in this field). Or we still do not have the scientific tools to discover this, perhaps in the future we will find an answer. (as most scientists say when they lack data)
Israel
The limits of the speed of light were determined by the laws of heaven and earth established by the creator of the world.
Did I spend a borderline? Able to increase the limits he set .. certainly
Miracles
When it was said, Thou shalt not covet. And the rest of the mitzvot. The first to hear it was Moshe Rebbe, so it is clear that if Moshe Rebbe is capable. Otherwise the first would not have heard this and more. Therefore, a person who studies Torah is clear to him that in all the prohibitions given in the Torah, he is capable of failing. And above all, he is able to fulfill all the good commandments. And free choice was not taken from us.
In our generation, unfortunately, the world is bombarded with material that is harmful to values from all directions...violence, etc.
And also the one that is close to the garbage gets the smell of the garbage. Including the obligatory contact of Jews
Mitzvot observant and those who are not Mitzvot observant for the time being. The connection grows more when there are those who answer
coming from all sectors.
The real wonder is how not everyone is infected with it. Like in a world whose fruits are sand. (Similar to the dirt snake you will eat all your life.. this is its reality only material. There is no spirituality)
Israel
I think we are neighbors...
There is a question that has been troubling my mind for a long time, and I would be happy if a box or another commenter who understands a thing or two about Kabbalah and the occult could perhaps give an opinion on it:
Can the Almighty double the speed of light?
Thanks.
box.
And meanwhile, rabbis are going to prison at a dizzying rate...
PS - you can afford to look at the other two links as well.
Out of the box,
Regarding the book, I suggest that you call the Book Junction (or Steamtsky) in the area where you are supposed to be and make sure that the book is in the store. If not, then ask them to order it for you. The book usually arrives at the store within a few days of ordering.
moderation.
rival
I allowed myself to look at one link you sent in depth Berkowitz
Amazing where the world is headed. At this rate our lives will be managed by artificial intelligence at every turn
Everything that the person will need will be placed in front of him physically without effort. The computer will manage even better and the system will be more accurate
Are scientists at this point thinking about protections against criminals and greedy people. They will probably use these abilities to their advantage. Is it possible to teach artificial intelligence basic morality?
It seems to me at this point that the computer doesn't care that much if it won or lost a game of Pac Man.
While the person is excited
fight
About the book
I consulted with rabbis and.. setthaam
The truth is I live in the holy city of Safed. I looked in stores and couldn't find the book.
Next week, Tuesday, Wednesday, I will be at the center and buy the book
Somehow the word difficult got mixed up in my definition
Miracles
It seems to me that the four comments I have written so far are being reviewed. I hope it doesn't pass.
Your field interests me.
If we pass the censorship hurdle I will ask many questions.. Knowledge of everything has always fascinated me.
rival
I allowed myself to look at one link you sent in depth Berkowitz
Amazing where the world is headed. At this rate our lives will be managed by artificial intelligence at every turn
Everything that the person will need will be placed in front of him physically without effort. The computer will manage even better and the system will be more accurate
Are scientists at this point thinking about protections against criminals and greedy people. They will probably use these abilities to their advantage. Is it possible to teach artificial intelligence basic morality?
It seems to me at this point that the computer doesn't care that much if it won or lost a game of Pac Man.
While the person is excited
It may even belong to the realm of miracles
Don't worry Shmulik
The claim has not yet been disproved
The research team simply emphasized that the methodology of the experiment was so problematic that no conclusions can be drawn from rest.
Until they repeat the experiment outside the atmosphere under vacuum and low temperature conditions, it will not be possible to disprove the claim for thrust.
Our hope of flying to the moon in 4 hours is not lost yet...
Shmulik
Right. I remember the reaction of CERN director Sergio Bertolucci to the story of the neutrino - "In Italy, nothing arrives before time..."
box.
I am a software engineer, and most of my experience is in aviation, simulation, and graphics.
I have no formal medical education, but I spend many hours in operating rooms, learning how our system can help more. The system, among other things, shows three-dimensional models of the brain of the person being operated on. The models contain several types of information: such as anatomy, blood flow and information flow in the brain. To speak as surgeons, we have to learn a lot of concepts. We want to emphasize the pathology and less what is distant. For example, in the case of a tumor, the surgeon wants to see the tumor itself, the feeding and draining blood vessels, and the flow of information close to the tumor, especially from the entrance vestibule side. The main limitation is the quality of the scans. An improvement in a CT scan, for example, means a higher intensity, and/or a longer time, which is problematic, of course, if it is a child or a baby.
I don't know material in Hebrew, most of it is in difficult English (and English is my mother tongue).
I will be happy to answer any questions I can.
rival
This is how I planned to write
Regarding science fiction.
We see today that science fiction in many fields indeed inspired and even preceded the later... with all this the execution of the idea in the right way is done by scientific development.
For example (if I'm not mistaken his name was Icarus) wanted to fly. It can be said in a limited way that it was the science fiction of that time.
Although he used the feathers. And the real idea at the end was scientifically expressed that the construction of the wings in the airplane is based on the principle of the aerodynamic structure of the chicken wings.
Ditto Zoll Warren's flight to the moon. and Nautilus
Isaac Asimov's basic ideas in The Selfish Robot Tomorrow Times Nine.
The most beautiful thing is that when they wrote what they wrote it seemed even fiction and not just science fiction.
Inconceivably. And the wonder is that reality exceeded even their imagination because with all their imagination they were limited to the data that belonged to the period.
See the Star Trek of thirty years ago depicting a world much more futuristic than our times. The equipment in the series is outdated and clumsy.
The idea is that reality surpasses all imagination.
Miracles,
You piece of joy killer like you 🙂
The truth is that this case as well as the faster-than-light neutrino (which made echoes at the time) are an excellent example of how science advances. Someone makes a claim and presents their data for all to see. When it is presented for all to see, it is examined in the most direct way with a persistent attempt to reproduce the results and alternatively, to refute the claim. That's the only way nonsense gets out of the way.
rival
The first line I wrote
Regarding science fiction
Went in not the way I wanted
rival
Regarding science fiction
About the book
I consulted with rabbis and.. setthaam
The truth is I live in the holy city of Safed. I looked in stores and couldn't find the book.
Next week, Tuesday, Wednesday, I will be at the center and buy the book.
Miracles
interesting
Where can you find more material on the subject if there is preferably in Hebrew
What does your field mean? Do you also practice actual medicine? That is, a surgeon, etc. or from the necessity of actually entering the field and learning about the brain
its structure and operations
Out of the box,
Science fiction is fun and nice and also inspiring, but the one who really paves the way to correcting the world from its ignorance is science.
I'm waiting for you to tell me that you bought the book, and I hope that you will read it with the real purpose of learning new and interesting things and not with the purpose of bashing and looking for where the scientists are wrong.
Shmulik
For you:
http://arstechnica.com/science/2015/08/heres-why-scientists-havent-invented-an-impossible-space-engine/?utm_source=howtogeek&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter
box.
I have no idea what the religion of the patients is... Some are Jewish, but there are from all religions.
It has nothing to do with Maya or 3D Max, because we don't work with polygons. The source of the information is volumetric scans - imagine a cube of points, where each point has a characteristic of intensity, hydrogen or oxygen flow, and so on. The programs you described create a synthetic world by combining triangles that have a texture - here we get a "real" world that we need to present. In this world there is CT data, and MRI, and also information flow within the brain, such as movement, language and vision. We do introduce a few things in OpenGL, like clips for vents, drains and so on.
rival
By the way, in the series of the other institution. Isaac Asimov's Institution and Empire, etc
I saw quite a similarity in having a small group. that fixes the world after its destruction.
It reminds a little of the goal of the people of Israel with the Torah of Israel. After the sin of the first Adam... the correction of the world from its ignorance
Miracles
Beautiful interesting.
Well, then you become a soldier in saving souls. And everyone who saves one soul from Israel is as if he saved a whole world.
Bless you, I envy you.
By the way, it reminds me of the Maya. And the 3DS max
Is there a connection to the programming of this?
And there were actually very impressive breakthroughs in the subject of neural networks.
Here is a network that taught itself to play computer games and defeated even the professionals:
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-31623427
And another one, because the topic is really interesting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYfZv-dZB3s
Omer Berkowitz,
It's nice that you base your theories on science fiction books, and maybe they can really inspire future research on the subject, but scientists base their conclusions mainly on real science and laboratory studies, and these show what I wrote before (the number of nerve cells and their connectivity).
If you haven't seen it yet, watch the following lecture, it's really good:
https://www.ted.com/talks/suzana_herculano_houzel_what_is_so_special_about_the_human_brain?language=he
(and not long either)
box.
Just click on the link of my name.
Opponent: Here is my point - they studied the pattern quite a bit and the reference was always to the size and the salvation did not come from there. My change in thinking about speed gained momentum after reading the book "City" by Clifford Simak and "Space Currents" by A. Asimov. - Although these are MDB books and have nothing to do with reality, this does not negate the basic assumption that the speed of the flow of information in the most efficient way will have serious consequences for the development of human culture. - If they succeed in this.
Miracles
I am interested in .
Please resend the link
rival
I understand what you are saying. I have a religious good friend. He says simply: I believe in God, I believe in everything that science has found, and I have no answers for everything. We talk about many topics and we respect each other. It is clear that the Torah is a collection of stories, and there is room to interpret them to benefit.
box.
Before you accuse me of inaccurately quoting the Torah - maybe you should once read what is written there, and not the excuses (sorry "Pharisees") that you feed on.
Miracles,
I don't agree with you, I don't think he is knowingly lying.
I think he really really, really really believes with all his heart in the nonsense he is talking.
Yes, I know it's sad, but people waste their lives on these things, on fairy tales.
box.
I can't believe even you believe your disgusting stack of lies. I dedicated most of my life to the security of Israel, as a soldier and a software engineer who developed weapons of war. At a certain point, I was persuaded to use my knowledge to develop a system that would be used by brain surgeons for diagnosis and to shorten surgery times. Enter the link. Mine, if that interests you. As part of the development, I come across complicated cases of brain defects, especially in children, babies, and even fetuses.
If you think I care what the crime of a 30 week old fetus is then you are an idiot. And if you think that the fetus is being punished for someone else's crime then you idiot is a compliment...
rival
Ok
Out of the box,
God does not exist, despite all your quibbles.
We already talked about it and you even agreed that 80% of the smartest people in the world (scientists, doctors...) don't believe in God and accept the *fact* of evolution, so get over it already, we've chewed it enough.
I really don't know how to eat what you wrote because you just wrote a bunch of nonsense, decided something stupid and stated that it was a fact, and now you ask me to comment on it?
Maybe you haven't seen many science fiction movies, the Matrix for example where it becomes clear to the humans that they are actually living inside a computer simulation of a giant computer. Humans invented a thousand and one imaginary characters with superpowers, so of all these characters God is the imaginary character with the strongest superpowers, so what? Does this prove that he really exists?!
"The very existence of it in thought proves its existence"
Absolutely not, Pinocchio exists in my head and we know that he is only an imaginary character.
"I think means I exist"
correct! If *I* think means I exist, if God thought then he would also exist, but he doesn't. He doesn't think, and he doesn't exist.
You waste your life on fairy tales and gossip.
I'm sorry but that's the truth, I don't want to bother you.
The Torah says in Aramaic
"The perception of you is out of mind"
The meaning is that the human mind has no possibility of grasping the Creator at all
rival
All the examples you gave are valid
Superheroes. The concept of a hero certainly exists when it comes to power. The supreme concept exists in several layers.
The sun god, for example, the sun exists. And if you mean a god like all the Greek gods. After all, they all have definitions that exist in the world. Mainly based on power.
Pinocchio is a fictional character based on the wooden hut.
Mila would say fairies it's already more difficult. But at least there is something to compare them to
They are limited in their abilities like any other creature, they can fly, they can disappear and appear. Our brain experiences all these data day and night.
This entity called the Creator has no equal in all of creation and has no resemblance
rival
Sorry, this was meant for you.
When I said that you will bring three things that do not exist, I mean that they have no equal in the world. For example, if you say spaghetti is invisible, then spaghetti exists and the concept of invisible exists.
If you tell me the big bang. So there is a bang in our world and there is a big one.
I mean, can you bring something that doesn't exist?
In no way whatsoever
There is no like, there is no equal
As they say about the Creator of the world "Who is like you and who will be equal to you"
The human brain is limited by the data it receives and defines them.
He cannot produce anything else outside of these data.
He could produce variations. And the compositions are different and different with these data. but cannot produce something that does not exist.
He argued whether there is such a reality called a Creator with the data presented in the Torah of Israel. (and not in Christianity)
The very argument about a thing that has nothing but evil in any way that is in our senses. That's why we define it in the negative. He does not have a body and does not have the image of the body, etc.
The very reference to that of 80% of the people in the world
proves that he exists otherwise he would not have been caught by our means. And also in the wisdom of those who understand what it is about (like you for example)
Its very invention in thought proves its existence.
You know that "I think means I exist"
Three examples not three.
You have many mistakes like this, give some respect to your sacred language.
Out of the box,
My name is Rival, no miracles! You get a bit of a mess in your head from too much gossip 🙂
"The problem of our brain is that it is not able to invent something that does not exist"
Say, are you kidding or is this a joke?!
1. Pinocchio.
2. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.
3. God.
4. Souls.
5. The next world.
6. The gods from Greek mythology.
7. The Flying Spaghetti Monster (although I personally believe it exists)
8. Superheroes (Superman, Spider-Man...)
9. The sun god.
10. The sea god Neptune.
Is that enough for you or do you want more?
Miracles
The problem of our brain is that it is not able to invent something that does not exist
please
Give me three examples
You decided that God exists, and that's it.
based on what? God knows.
So it's not, you're wrong.
Out of the box,
If God existed he would really be sitting and laughing at you from above...
"Science has no proof that there is no creator... there is no scientific way to check this"
Again, haven't you realized that this is true for anything that doesn't exist?
What does not exist cannot be tested either, why do you refuse to understand something so simple?
Really, it's a thousand words in logic.
a rival Miracles. and so'
One more detail we forgot that science has no proof that there is no creator.
Of course, they throw it out of the blue and as proven. There is not was and will not be.
And again the reason is simple, there is no scientific way to check this.
Even with all human beings they will decide that there is no Creator (see an imaginary article byRoey Tsezana) as they tried in the Tower of Babel. There will still be no proof of his absence.
And he sits and looks and laughs from above
Out of the box,
Unfortunately I don't have time right now to answer you, but you really made a mess of things. I hope that Ethan, Nissim or someone else from the group will find time to answer your questions.
rival
One of the scientists' problems is that they miss basic data.
You forgot it was at the age of 17
Don't worry, I will buy the book, read it and treat it accordingly
Not that he scares me. In the meantime you will agree with me
So far we have come to some conclusions
A. There is no absolute knowledge in science, especially regarding theories. And in particular regarding theories about the past even though we have current data. which we assume arrived because of a process. And even if we have a complete sequence of a process, which is not the case with the bang. And about evolution. For we are missing a small simple step in the formation of life. Are we the result of aliens? (life that came from space) or not. How did the first living cell form? Basic eyes. But fundamental and the opinions of course tend in several directions.
B. According to science there is no such reality of abstract and absolute infinity
C. New theories can change old theories. An example of string theories.
d. Theories collide with theories for example quantum and relativity
God. Today it is not possible for us to create an experiment that includes all the conditions that existed in the past. A simple example does not have all the elements that were according to the theory.
Omer Berkowitz,
I think you are wrong, the main emphasis is on the number of nerve cells and the connections between them. The difference in the speed of information transmission is negligible, certainly among the mammal family (mice, cats, monkeys, humans).
Response to the opponent - brain size is not the name of the game. but the speed of transferring the information to the relevant places. That's where you should put the point.
Out of the box,
"Why, apart from humans, animals are not interested in an abstract painting. Why don't they make cars? And no light bulbs..."
The reason for this is simple, their brains are much smaller than ours, so accordingly they also have much more modest mental abilities.
Doesn't that make sense to you?
Correction - the conclusion you reached.
Out of the box,
Once again, I encourage you to buy the book I recommended to you as soon as possible ("Why evolution is true") and sit down to read it, I think it will answer most of your questions - the balance in nature and how each animal "found its place", reason, morals... just read it and expand a little horizons
I'm sorry but the conclusion I reached is wrong, you are dedicating your life to a legend.
God does not exist.
rival
At 17, that's what you thought
since in an evolutionary process of thought (according to your method)
My conclusion is one and only. There is no other besides him, zero other than him
rival
First, thank you for the compliment
What you are thinking today I thought at the age of 17. After reading several Life books about the structure in the natural system (if you know what it is about) I was sitting in the school yard during recess. And I watched.
Every plant and animal in nature has a role that fits into the natural balance.
Nature created them in a process of millions of years step by step one complements the other. ..but as a painter I asked myself why, apart from man, animals are not interested in an abstract painting. Why don't they make cars? And no light bulbs. Why don't they harm nature as man does with environmental pollution.. then they haven't talked so much about the greenhouse effect and damage to the ozone.
I actually asked myself. Nature has given a role to each individual in this system, a role that completes the system.
But something in man nature has given is different. After all, if we are some spoiled mutation of nature, inevitably as a non-human species we must be erased.
But we see that after millions of years it is not like that. We multiply and change and increasingly control the laws of nature.
I asked myself then what is our role as humans within the natural balance in nature.
The question was actually a non-religious question. She was then what is our role in the natural system. As every animal and plant has a route with a plan.
Moreover, I said to myself, take the person out of the equation and everything will be balanced.
More deliberately I asked what man lives for as an evolutionary product
The answer I came to is that probably before death in the last moments of a person when all the images of life pass before him he finds the taste and reason for his life.
Out of the box,
He lived because life was created on earth and there was an evolutionary process that caused them to develop, he died because evolution is far from perfect and this also explains all the flaws that Nissim and I showed you earlier.
Everyone chooses their purpose in life, it is not something that is dictated from above.
For example, you decided that your purpose is to write comic books for children, very beautiful in my opinion.
rival
The funny thing is that when a good person dies everyone says poor man was a good person why did he die.
But no one asks why he lives.
Even here there are those whose lives have no purpose or goal
rival
You are indeed right about taking the son. And the agony the parents went through was indeed difficult.
Regarding the boy, I understood that it works out for you. Because as far as you are concerned there is no afterlife and souls and the like. So according to you, when he dies, he has no feeling, nothing.
Or even if it is said that there is a world to come, he ascends to a world that is all good.
So your problem now is with the parents.. I understand.. and the child is fine. Because according to the Torah of Israel there is a Creator who created two worlds, this world and the next.
The world to come is a world where all souls enjoy the blessings of the Shekinah so according to this. The baby won. Wait, his parents who were religious also thought like me. So maybe when they found out what privilege they had to raise such a high soul for two years. By virtue of being believers, this knowledge may have softened the pain... or for another reason that belongs to their soul. And she is not mentioned in the story. They were supposed to receive these torments. for this matter. The question remains open and since I am not the Beshat I do not have an answer.
Box According to this logic, it's okay for God to abuse poor parents whose heart's desire is to raise a child, but after they bond with the child God suddenly decides that he is a holy soul I don't care if his parents are sad and even broken because of his death, I don't even know if he wants to continue Live or not, let's kill him? Is this the same god you claim is highly moral? Imagine that this would have happened only in God's place there was a company that adopted children and after two years the company would have kidnapped the child from them and given him to other parents. It is not moral at all. If such a case had really happened that company would have been sued and there would have been a huge public uproar. You just prove how immoral your god is.
http://jewish-education.info/pnimi.org.il/yesodot/sipurim/SodHtinokSheniftar_F.asp.htm
A rival and miracles
Regarding your attempts to show flaws in children, or flaws in creatures, I will send you a link to the story in Aza.
Miracles
Regarding the biblical story
Unfortunately, you still haven't understood or I haven't clarified enough yet what the Holy Torah is.
I will try to explain it in your language.
When there is some complex calculation of sending a spacecraft to land on a meteor. A small error in the calculations will cause a safe deviation from the route. Every detail in the calculation should be as accurate as possible.
Likewise, when planning a bridge over which vehicles will pass for a long time, many data are calculated. In order for the bridge to function properly, every detail is absolutely precise
When a programmer sits on the creation of a computer game with many variables in real time. One possible letter can destroy details to complete the game as planned.
I guess you understood that.
When the Creator of the world writes before him the plan of the world. And according to this plan the world should be created. which includes everything that will be in the world from beginning to end. Including the letters that I am now writing and that you have written and that you will write. Including the atoms that moved and move and will move in the universe. Every atom and atom to the last of them. And he records all this in a book called Sefer Torah. Therefore, he is also holy due to his exclusive uniqueness that has no equal in the whole world and no one like him.
So when you understand it or then be more precise in the written words of the biblical story.
In any case, the way you wrote the biblical story in your response is not the way it is written.
When you are more specific I will take it more seriously
Miracles
I will take your words about the sick young woman at face value. With the assumption that you are engaged in the field of medicine.. in which case the merciful God has already given you a role in the world. And created you so that you would save the people whom he revives every moment from a thousand pounds. His mercy is expressed in the fact that he does not reveal to you what is the real reason why That woman is suffering. In his great mercy, he hides from you that it is very possible that if you knew the spiritual root (which cannot be measured with scientific tools, something related to the root of her soul) because of which she is suffering, you would have decided to leave the treatment immediately. From the mercy of the Creator, He created one like you to take care of this woman despite the degree of judgment hovering over her.
rival
A good example. For example - a pair of twins who are connected at the skull so that if one was standing the other would be standing on the head, but looking to the right side... Now - go figure out how to operate to save at least one of them.
This god has no limits….
box.
You really don't know the biblical story... most of the Pharisees have forgotten the source. God said "if you can eat from the tree you will die". The snake said "God is lying - what will really happen if you can from the tree is that you will have wisdom". After Adam ate from the tree - God said that now Adam would eat from the tree of life and not die. That is - a person would die even without eating from the tree of knowledge.
And now for the moral aspect - Adam sinned (he all ate from some stinking tree that only an evil god would place near him) and therefore his descendants are punished. Again - you believe in an immoral God (and a liar).
The issue of "the judge's discretion" is a relatively new issue in my understanding - and it has meaning because the laws do not stipulate a minimum sentence. So that you understand - where I used to live the penalty for parking in a handicapped spot is $250-$500. That is, the legislator set limits for the judge. Are you trying to justify that the death penalty that God told Adam was "maximum punishment", depending on the circumstances? 🙂
In any case - explain to me what science cannot investigate about the soul? I showed you that we can read minds, and there are many more amazing things that I haven't told you yet.
rival
Good Morning
I will briefly try to explain..
Just as there is a law in which there is a maximum penalty for transgression. And if and when a person commits a crime, he will stand trial before the judge. There are mitigating factors that make it necessary not to punish with the full severity of the law. Like the first time a transfer is made. Or there was an environmental impact on a transfer embryo. After all, these data are taken into account. and reduce the maximum penalty. And no one will say that the judge who underestimated the punishment is called a liar. Because he did not punish with the full severity of the law.
That is why in the Torah it is stated that the first Adam sinned for the first time. A sin whose maximum punishment is death. He was seduced by Eve, just as Eve was seduced by the serpent.
The creator who is called the judge of the whole earth made the trial to decide that the punishment is Expulsion from heaven. And the death penalty will come years later for him and his descendants.
Now it depends. Is the Creator as a judge merciful or a liar? The answer to this is given to everyone from his point of view
And as I said before, the Torah is a teaching language and here we learn from the Creator Himself that during the trial it is necessary and must take into account a measure of mercy
Miracles,
And what about babies who are born with severe defects?
What did they sin?
Out of the box,
That is, you are saying that the word God has a certain meaning, and the word "God" has a different meaning?
And do you think that explains the difficulty?
box.
A tiny example to make it clear to everyone (I guess you won't understand) how opaque you are:
I can ask you to think of a color, and tell you what color you are thinking of.
Science does not know how to explore a soul?? Try to understand the example I gave. I have many more of these - feelings, lies, sight, language, memories, pain. Just choose….
box.
Tomorrow I am dealing with a young patient who has an aneurysm in one of the main arteries in the brain, and in addition she has a tumor in the pituitary gland.
Only an evil person can think that there is a God who is merciful.
You may,
I curse the moment I got into this "smart" argument with you. It is impossible to get answers from you to the most direct and simple questions, as usual.
I will try again:
Entanglement was raised (if I'm not mistaken) by Schrödinger as a result of his understanding of the "respectable theory" called quantum mechanics. Then there were EPR and Bohr and Bell and more and more and finally also empirical experiments that proved that interweaving is an existing fact.
Below is an article that also links at the end to a scientific article that shows an interweaving for a distance of 300 km:
http://www.technologyreview.com/view/520886/japanese-telco-smashes-entanglement-distance-record/
1. Do you accept the fact that the motivation for the above experiment arose because the "respectable theory" predicted that this is how nature behaves and it should be tested?
2. Do you accept the fact that there was a connection to the above-mentioned distance?
3. Do you accept the fact that for 300 km, what was tested is completely consistent with quantum mechanics?
Very easy to answer my questions. Let's see how you will rattle off an unrelated, unclear and evasive answer
Out of the box,
Could you summarize in a few simple words what you wrote about God's lie about the apple? I read your 3 messages yesterday and I didn't really understand your words, unfortunately due to time pressure I currently don't have the opportunity to read one more time.
Science also has no tools at all to check and find out anything about the flying spaghetti monster, invisible dragons and the teapot that everyone knows goes around the sun.
Out of the box,
One of the first interpretations I found on Google for the word excuse is:
"A reason intended to justify an act that has a defect".
It does seem appropriate to me.
Miracles
about the soul
Science has no tools at all to check and find out about a nation. Science deals with matter and energy. The soul is a thing. Spiritual and abstract. And this site has no place to discuss it
Miracles
I understand that you do not accept the concept called excuses. But in studying the Torah it is actually acceptable and even desirable. The word draw used in football matches
Taken from the Gemara.. When there is no decision on one side or the other in a dispute between the Sages on a certain issue, Sages say the word Tikhu, the letters of which are the initials of "Tishbi Yitreshyot difficulties and problems"
The greater difficulty is to discover that the excuse shows that the Creator is merciful.
box.
Your Judaism is like Christianity - a collection of lame excuses. There is a well-known neurological phenomenon called when the two sides of the brain are disconnected. The right side causes the body to perform a certain action, and the left side looks for an excuse for this to be done. You still haven't explained to me at all how this can work in combination with the idea of a "soul".
But, I understand that you are busy reading "Origin of the Species".
box.
You keep repeating the same stupid arguments. We have seen that your belief is immoral and inconsistent with observations.
That sums it up for me.
Miracles
You are invited to read about the measures of the Creator. In the answer written to Ariel. before your section.
Ariel
The full answer to your question begins in the paragraph before Nisim writes to me. Because of the length of the answer, I divided it into 3 parts, sorry
Ariel
Continued..
We were writing below (in the following) on the day of the Lord's Esaut (the name of God, meaning XNUMX-XNUMX-XNUMX-XNUMX) teaches the measure of mercy.
..
Now the five-year-old child understands why the Creator does not give the full extent of the punishment to man. Because after passing a transgression, man stands trial before the Creator. That the Creator is merciful (for all those who wrote that he is cruel and wanted to know why the Creator is a liar and did not want to brutally kill the person right away) it is simple for the little child that the Creator had mercy on the person because he is merciful. Like a court that does not carry out the full sentence.
Ariel
So as we said.. Rashi does not see any difficulty.. not even with a child who is "five years old according to the Bible" (Fathers chapters).
The question is how it is possible that there is no problem here. After all, the Creator said so and behaved differently..well the explanation for this is
The child who is five years old and begins to read Genesis created the heavens and the earth.. and then we come across the words "on the day God created the heavens in the earth" immediately the simple question of what this is.. there is a contradiction here. First it is written that God created. And then God Almighty..
Here at the beginning it is written "A-Lakim" only and the continuation after the story of the creation is described again the creation as a whole towards its end before the creation of man. 2 Names "God Almighty"
So already in the first verse when the child is studying Rashi .. then Rashi explains the difficulty and these are his words.
"Bra a-Lakim - and did not God say (that is, it was not said in the beginning that God created) that in the beginning it arose in the mind (it arose in the mind of the creator of the world) to create in the measure of the law (to create the world in the measure of the law.. Each name of the seven holy names expresses an action of the revealed Creator For us.. as in the above case where God Almighty teaches about law and valor) see that the world does not exist (when he creates man and man sins. He will immediately have to punish him according to law. (And the whole world was created for man and man was created to serve the Creator. )) (therefore) preceded by mercy (that mercy is part of the way the judge uses before sentencing. Although the law is so and so for a particular case. There are no rulings on the full extent of the punishment. Rather, mitigating circumstances of the accused are taken into account)
box.
You probably showed that you don't understand much. Now you have demonstrated that you do not understand logic either 🙂
1) Complexity is not a sign of planning - rather simplicity is a sign of planning.
2) It's nice that you give an example of a Christian preacher... Completely coincidentally, the subject of my master's thesis was Paley's clock. I will say just one sentence: the most prominent sign of this plan is for you to decide. The clock has to decide. If you think yours is up to you, then I kind of feel sorry for you. I personally am not ready to be anyone's tool, certainly not of a cruel and lying god.
Ariel
Although I came across several interpretations of your question. Probably the great men of Israel also asked themselves this question. But I did not look at their answer before you
A. You yourself can find on Google
B. I was puzzled why Reshi does not excuse this problem.
For Rashi refers to even deeper and greater difficulties than this one. And he did not see fit to plead.
There are 2 options here. Once Rashi could not find an answer and left the question. But Rashi elsewhere. And in another matter. Saying without being ashamed.. I didn't know what it meant. And here are a few. And to say that Rashi was afraid to find out that he had no answer to speak.. then the sub-benefits are known.. Q. Wise about what he doesn't know says I don't know.
The second option is more likely. Rashi had no problem. The simple in turn solves the answer even for a small five-year-old child.
Miracles
Although God created the world. And he gave in creation "constitutions of heaven and earth", i.e. laws of behavior. We call these laws of nature... and precisely these laws of nature which are arranged in such a way as a machine. (Example of the food chain) The seasons. The natural system is wonderful .. until even the great scientists research and research .. and see the vast and limitless complexity of nature. If this is the human genome. If it is the particles from which matter exists. And witness the structure of the human brain. And more and more and still the study of nature still continues to surprise. And it doesn't seem like there will ever be an end to this study. In its enormous complexity.
This itself indicates that there is someone behind it who planned all this.
a parable to speak. that if you see a spring clock that shows the exact time. And the whole system of wheels and springs that are there... you will immediately understand that someone designed such a complex thing.
All the more so. And without value at all, the world we live in shows the one who created all of these.
Box, can you answer the simple question I asked? To remind you: Did God lie to Adam and Eve about the punishment for eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge? A one-word answer is enough, even one sentence will be enough as long as the answer is direct and not elusive (like the ways of God are hidden).
box.
You're just contradicting yourself over and over again. On the one hand you say that God created the world in such a way that the wave seems natural to us, and on the other hand you say that you see that God did it.
Without your boring quibbles - are you ready to decide?
rival
Regarding the percentages. I agree with you.
Roi Cezana brings this up in an article on this website.
But again there is a verse that says "Lift up your eyes to heaven and see who created these"
The structure of creation shows that it has a planner.
It is true that one can twist with theories (many accounts) than to simply see the guiding hand of the Creator (an honest person)
box, I can equally argue that having a large variety of noodles is the proof of the existence of the flying spaghetti monster, and conversely I can argue that the existence of such a large variety of noodles disproves the existence of the flying spaghetti monster (a rival sent me for these heretical words but I have to Show the point :). Knows what? I can claim that proof of the existence of the flying spaghetti monster is the existence of the nebula M57 (a very beautiful nebula by the way).
rival
I will listen to your advice and buy
Out of the box,
Regarding the beginning of life, see the link I gave you earlier (I don't know if you saw the response).
Out of the box,
Please check the percentage of scientists/doctors who reject the theory of evolution and/or believe in God.
Hint - it's a really small number.
box.
That's a good question, and the answer has nothing to do with evolution. That's why I wanted to start with evolution - given a first replicator, and suitable conditions for evolution - will we get the variety of species we know? Darwin arrives at this from observation, and even gives a rebuttal test in the book.
The book is written with great modesty, by one of the people who changed the world. Amazing to me.
Out of the box, it's Ariel who wrote it for you (even though he's absolutely right).
rival
"which is the only proof of its existence"
The wonderful universe is the proof. The nation of Israel is the proof.. The Land of Israel is the proof.
Unfortunately only 80% of the world is imagined. Some of them are also scientists. Doctors, businessmen, leaders, etc.
The other 5% percent are the righteous ones.. because the other 15% either don't know how to think or are idolaters. Or they didn't put any thought into the eyes.
Usually a crazy person is sure that he is right and everyone else is wrong..
Look for the story of Rabbi Nachman of Breslav
Out of the box,
The book that Nissim referred you to is indeed old and very out of date, since it was published there have been many fascinating discoveries in the field, so it is much better that you read the book that I recommended to you which is also simpler to read.
Can you explain to me what the problem is with going to a bookstore and buying it? I'm sure you won't get poor from buying this book, and you'll also find it much more comfortable to read (what's more, if you manage to find a copy of it online, you know it will be an illegal copy...that is, theft, and you're acting according to the Ten Commandments, right?).
You're not too lazy to walk two meters to buy it in a bookstore, are you?
Regarding the beginning of life, this is really not a problem (it is interesting that with the beginning of God's existence you have no problem...) Here is a short video that explains the matter:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plzUvD2O42Q
Go buy the book.
Miracles
I really need to read carefully. I promise I will. It will probably take some time.
You yourself said that part of what is written is not accurate for today..that's why I turned to the link sent to me by an opponent. I was hoping it was a more advanced book.. Indeed it is an advanced book
But this is only an article about the book and not the book itself unfortunately.. maybe you will be able to send me a link. To tell that an opponent sent me.
This will save me and you time and energy.
By the way, the first problem I managed to encounter already at the beginning.
How was life created in the beginning .. did it come from space or from earth. What caused the formation of the living cell
box.
What exactly is outdated in the "Origin of the Species"? What doesn't seem right to you?
You wanted a link - you got a link to a book in Hebrew. I want to know what you don't see in the book. Otherwise, how will we move forward?
Unfortunately, God's adversary does not live only in the imagination of a box, but also in the imagination of about 80% of the world.
Box, I guess you're not going to answer the simple question I asked you, at least not a direct answer, please correct me if I'm wrong.
I understand very well which god you are talking about. You are talking about an imaginary God whose only proof of existence is a book that was written in parts over ~900 years (from the Exodus from Egypt to the destruction of the Second Temple (according to Wikipedia), by hundreds of different people, most of whom were not even first-hand witnesses to the events they describe (for example Deuteronomy, according to Many archaeologists believe it was written by Ezra the Scribe about 500 years after Joshua), and it is possible that many parts written during those 900 years were removed/distorted.
Rival and Ariel
Your limitation is that everything seems to you to exist in the form of matter. And you can understand that I also agree. that the God you speak of does not exist. ” And our God, blessed be His name, since His power has no end and does not stop, for the wheel is always turning, His power has no physical strength. And since he is not a body, the events of bodies will not occur so that he is divided and separated from another; Therefore there cannot be but one. And knowing this is a commandment to do, as it is said, "The Lord our God, the Lord is one" (Deuteronomy XNUMX:XNUMX).
XNUMX After all, it is explained in the Torah and the Prophet that the Holy One, blessed be He, does not have a body and a dead body: as it is said, "For the Lord your God is God in the heavens above and on the earth beneath" (see Deuteronomy XNUMX:XNUMX; Joshua XNUMX:XNUMX), and the body will not be in two places. And it is said: "Because you have not seen any image" (Deuteronomy XNUMX:XNUMX), and it is said: "To whom will you imagine me, and I will compare you" (Isaiah XNUMX:XNUMX); And while there was a body, it was similar to other bodies. ” taken from Rambam
Out of the box,
The difference between the creator and the big bang theories is that the big bang is a fact and reality, God on the other hand only exists in your imagination.
Open up and you'll understand already.
(What about the book, have you read it yet?)
Rival and Ariel
The difference between the creator and the bang theories in the Rambam's language..." If the deity were many - there would be bodies and corpses, because there is no equal number in finding them separate from each other except in the event that the bodies and corpses happen. Whereas the creator was a body and a corpse - he had an end and a purpose, that it is impossible to have a body that has no end. And everything that has an end and a purpose, its power has an end and an end.
rival
Regarding the laws of nature
There are direct instructions from the Creator in His Torah how to relate to these laws that He established in His world.
With one of her noodles you meant.
Rival I also can't prove it's actually the Flying Spaghetti Monster doing it with one of its long arms.
Ariel,
You can't prove that God doesn't twist it with his hand.
Out of the box,
Why did God lie? He promised that all food from the fruits of knowledge will die in it in a day! Why didn't he keep his promise? Where is his credibility?
It really angers me.
Something else in section C of the long answer you sent, write something about the rotation of the earth. I don't know if you know this but the earth continues its rotation because of the laws of physics (the law of conservation of momentum) and not because of an incredibly huge entity orbiting it. This also applies to every planet that exists in the universe.
Box you didn't give me a direct answer. again. You keep saying that God is a God of truth but in the end, did he lie to the woman yes or no? A one word answer will do.
Out of the box,
"There are many laws of nature, among them gravity, acceleration, deceleration... We Jews are not slaves to these forces"
Interestingly, there were many (Jews) who jumped from a high place and discovered in practice that they were also subject to these laws.
(Gravity in this case)
Basic laws of the Torah chapter one
A. The foundation of the foundations and the pillar of wisdom, for the knowledge that there is a first name. And he invents everything that exists; And all that is found from heaven and earth and what is between them, were not found except by the truth of their being found. [b] And if it is conceivable that it is not found, nothing else can be found. [XNUMX] And if it comes to mind that all things that exist apart from Him are found, He alone will be found and He will not be canceled for their cancellation: all things that are need Him; And he, blessed be he, does not need them, not one of them.
Therefore, its truth is not the same as the truth of one of them. [XNUMX] It is that the prophet says "And the Lord God is truth" (Jeremiah XNUMX:XNUMX) - He alone is the truth, and there is no other truth like His truth. And it is that the Torah says, "There is no other, besides Him" (Deuteronomy XNUMX:XNUMXa), that is, there is no truth found there other than Him like Him.
XNUMX [E] This being is the God of the world, the Lord of the whole earth. And he is the leader of the wheel with power that has no end and purpose, with power that has no end, that the wheel always turns, and it is impossible for it to turn without turning; And blessed is he who spins it, without hand or body.
XNUMX [XNUMX] And knowing this is a mitzvah to do, as it is said, "I am the Lord your God" (Exodus XNUMX:XNUMX; Deuteronomy XNUMX:XNUMX). And anyone who thinks that there is another God, apart from this, transgresses by not doing, as it is said "Thou shalt have no other God before me" (Exodus XNUMX; Deuteronomy XNUMX:XNUMX); And village above all, which is the great main thing on which everything depends.
E [XNUMX] This God is one - he is neither two nor more than two, but one, whose uniqueness is not one of the ones in the world: not one as a species that includes many ones, and not one as a body that is divided into departments and ends; But a uniqueness that has no other uniqueness like it in the world.
Ariel and Rival
It is indeed the will of the Creator that we be slaves to the Creator and not slaves to slaves.
There are slaves to nature and its holes worshiping the laws assuming that they are superior above any other situation.
They are the ones who dictated these laws in the beginning and later. and to this day dictate our lives. This is the basis for foreign work. That is, foreign to non-defects.
Judaism rises higher and higher above this disability
.. for example a mathematician called Albanzo .. fiercely claimed that there is no end to mathematics. And I didn't understand how that could be. But thanks to a referral. Shmulik's for some article. And after checking what is infinite in mathematics, I understood. Albentazo reinforces a concept mentioned in Judaism as having no number. There is no number of groups or numbers, etc. but no, there is no pure end in its dissolution as stated in Judaism.. This is where the science of mathematics gets stuck. He remains confined within the box of numbers.
Also regarding the laws of nature. There are many laws of nature, among them gravity, acceleration, deceleration. more and more. Everyone is separated..
In order for there to be an explosion, for example, some forces needed to exist in nature.
We Jews are not slaves to these forces, we are slaves to the Creator in his own right. The one who is above all forces, all above time and the place of origin of everything that exists..
And to save excuses, the Torah in Genesis says:
"And of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat from it, for in the day you eat of it you will die."
That is, the warning clearly spoke about the eating day itself (which, as mentioned, did not happen).
"In addition, God said that if they touched the fruit of the tree of knowledge they would die, but when the woman touched the fruit and even ate it she continued to live, does that mean that God lied to her?"
Very beautiful Ariel, beautiful point!!!
Out of the box,
How was God created? Where did he come from??
Just a reflection on Alma 🙂
Disputable* non-compliance
A box according to your claim, God intended us humans to be slaves who would subjugate him with almost no obedience at all?
In addition, God said that if they touched the fruit of the tree of knowledge they would die, but when the woman touched the fruit and even ate it she continued to live, does that mean God lied to her? And if he lied to her in that case why wouldn't God lie about other things?
rival
Gravity??
How was it created? Where did he come from??
Actually the laws of nature???
Do they exist because that's the way it is in this thing called nature.. Just a thought in my mind
rival
Straight from the hotel
Random - male
Unplanned, not prepared in advance, accidental.
contingency
The absence of pattern and order, or a state of coincidence in relation to a given event. In another wording, randomness is a chaotic situation, which is not driven or directed to any purpose, is made or occurs without a conscious trend or choice.
Out of the box,
"If I understood the theory correctly. So it is true for the stage until the formation of life. And even their first beginning was all a random process"
No, read the article again. The Earth's gravity gave it an advantage in terms of receiving and creating the materials and gases that allowed life to form, gravity is also the one that shaped the particles into Earth and the Sun... It's not random and it's not accidental.
Out of the box,
The difference compared to the book is that it only makes you wise if you read it, on the other hand from the wonderful apple tree of the Torah it is enough to just eat, or so I thought.
Out of the box,
"How do you get to the book itself"
I thought it was obvious, you go into a bookstore (for example, "Junction of books") where you live, it is better to call first and see if the book is available... buy, read and enjoy.
rival
By the way, she sent me to some article about a published book full of service and praise. About the book..
Find out how you get to the book itself
I can also send you to read psalms all service and praise and this time about the real thing the Creator
rival
About the worms on the tree
I once did an experiment with the chicken we had in the yard.. I put an open book with Darwin's theory of evolution in front of it. I placed grains on the book.
For two weeks she picked the grains. And with it the book. After the slaughter we did to her we examined her brain. Nothing has changed.. It seems to me that it would be fine if the worms ate from the tree of knowledge. Worms would have remained when they were
rival
I'm sorry I won't refer to your last pregnancy. But I will send you to the journal Galileo, you are probably familiar with it http://telem.openu.ac.il/courses/c20237/lifeori-g.htm
If I understood the theory correctly. So it is true for the stage until the formation of life. And even their first beginning was all a fortuitous process
Out of the box,
I'm sure there were also some worms on this tree that ate the fruit, why didn't they become so smart?
Huh, maybe these are actually Zamir Cohen's wonderful dill worms that shoot powerful laser beams?
Ariel
You asked what would happen if an animal was a sinner
I thought you knew something about the simple story of creation as written in Torah Emet.
But in this area there is probably some ignorance.
A. The only one who was commanded by the Creator not to eat from the tree of knowledge was the first man.
B. Because control was given to man over every beast of the field and over the fish of the sea. He also influences them for the better.
third. Free choice was given only to man and not to animals. Therefore, even only man is given orders. Because he is the only one of all creation who has a choice whether to fulfill God's will or not
Even if all the animals one by one ate from the tree of knowledge they would not be punished. Because they did not receive an order not to eat
"I will indeed take a week and read"
Out of the box,
You made me very happy! I hope you are not just saying this sarcastically, and that you will actually read this book soon.
"Up until the formation of life actually from the big bang was everything accidental?"
No, all this was not accidental, gravity caused the particles created in the big bang to attract each other and form into stars and galaxies, the particles didn't just move randomly in space, they were attracted to each other and that's where it all started.
Box, you don't give me an honest answer, only parables and legends...
rival
I will indeed take a week and read
But first answer me
So until the formation of life actually from the big bang everything was accidental?
Or there was intelligence hidden somewhere within the big bang process
Miracles.
I entered Darwin. This book does belong to the old school.
Ariel
Right. It is indeed a Torah given to humans. As the angels claimed, this will be answered at Mount Sinai. "Hamada Gnoza" they said about the Torah "Will you give to humans??
The Creator demanded from Moses that he answer
And Moses answered. - Are you flesh and blood, do you have a bad instinct..
It is clear that the Torah was given to humans and there is a commandment and you recited it day and night.
Regarding animals that have sinned, the commandment is given to man and not to animals. The control over the animals was also given to man.
When a person sinned, his sin also affected the animals.
"Yariv, I would appreciate it if you sent me links. Those who explain how intelligence was created from the big bang, etc. Preferably in Hebrew.
And it's better written and not a clip... Thank you"
Out of the box,
There is the Big Bang, then the creation of the first living cell (biogenesis), and finally evolution. If you want to know how intelligence evolved (cats, crows, foxes and monkeys also have intelligence, and many laboratory tests prove it) then you must study the theory of evolution that explains it, take a week of fun and please read the book I recommended, I promise you will enjoy it from him.
Don't be afraid to expand your horizons and learn new things you didn't know before.
box, what would happen if another animal ate from the tree of knowledge?
Out of the box,
The book that Nissim recommended was good, but it is also very old and out of date, since it was published we have discovered many new discoveries that confirm the theory of evolution, please read instead an excellent and much easier to read book that also contains all the updated discoveries related to the subject:
Why evolution is true:
http://www.text.org.il/index.php?book=1305033
Box, I agree with you that the same scientist will explain his idea in words, but this is where your analogy ends. Unfortunately, the one who explains the Torah is not the one who wrote it, but flesh and blood people and people have a tendency not to understand or interpret things in order to support their world view. A great example of this is you. You don't understand subjects like physics and biology and yet you insist on arguing with people who study the same subjects without trying to learn from them.
Ariel
According to the explanation I gave. Your first question needs an explanation. Otherwise there is indeed a place for your question
And here King Solomon in the congregation brings an explanation for the sin of the first Adam.
"I alone saw this discovery, that God made man upright; And what many have asked for accounts." "
When the Creator created man, he gave him simple qualities and simple leadership. which does not include within it something called a bad instinct (this concept also needs explanation) it was completely separate from the bad instinct. Another detail with which man was created is free choice. Is it to fulfill the divine commands in an honest and simple way? Or check if the thing is "good for the poor and worthy of food."
Then go over the prohibition to eat from the tree of knowledge.
The choice was made as you know and its result immediately affected the person. Like the venom of a snake that immediately enters the entire blood system and spreads throughout the body.
An additional driving force entered the person that was not included in him.
From that moment the free choice became more difficult. It requires man's struggle with himself.
box.
And by the way - there are mistakes in the book. I will test you on them, to know if you read properly.
box.
And before the excuses - here is a link:
http://www.kotar.co.il/KotarApp/Viewer.aspx?nBookID=97689052#3.8898.1.default
box.
You wrote "I would be happy if you send me links. The ones who explain how intelligence was created from the Big Bang, etc."
Why would you be happy? You have already decided in advance that all science is a lie.
You know what? Because, unlike you, my beliefs really have sources - here is the first link: "The Origin of Species" by Charles Darwin. It's a light and nice book, and is halfway between the big bang and human reason.
After you read, study and understand this book, the most important book in the world in my opinion, we can move forward - forward, or backward, as you choose.
But - no comment from you until you read the whole book, ok?
If you do not read, we will know not to consider your requests anymore.
Ariel
The explanation of the formula that includes the creation of the world and the universe. and in particular man. The experience called Torah. It is an explanation that is transmitted orally and requires learning. This explanation is brought to us by Hezal in the Oral Torah. That is why they are also called interpretations of the Torah.
Ariel
I just saw your comment
First I will answer with your permission from the end to the beginning. Although the correct need is to answer first first and last last.
The Torah is made up of two layers that complement each other and serve as one complete unit. One is written Torah and the other is oral Torah.
An example can be taken.
From a scientist who wrote some formula and even wrote the way through it, he arrived at it with numbers and letters.
The more complex the process and the complexity of the formula will be. Even if the result will be very simple consisting of three letters and one number
Like the letters E, MC and the number 2 and the form =
There is still a need for a scientist to explain this to others. Although the formula is already written in writing. The scientist will explain the formula in many words...
Therefore similarly.
When Moshe received the Torah, he received along with the method of studying it XNUMX midods that the Torah requires. Also explanations for the words of Totfat. And the meaning of the words between your eyes. And exactly what is a rabbit and a rabbit and a bat.
This Torah, which expresses the basic data, is called the Torah in writing.
Oral Torah reveals the direction to the north in verses and letters and punctuation and tone and flavors.
It is true that there is a sect that differentiates itself from a sweet one who by mouth are the so-called Karaites .. who walk but scream according to the Bible
A box, a creature of the size you describe should collapse in on itself due to the enormous gravity it has and become a black hole. It's interesting that even though you have no basic knowledge of physics, you continue to come up with ridiculous arguments on topics you don't understand.
rival
I would appreciate it if you could send me links. Those who explain how intelligence was created from the big bang, etc. Preferably in Hebrew.
And it's better written and not a clip... Thanks
I chose the word worm. From the verse, "I am a worm and despised by the people"
Miracles
Amethin
It will probably be released
Out of the box,
It has already been explained to you several times both by the physicists and by the supporters of the theory of evolution here that all the things you described are not random or coincidental at all, it is a shame that you continue to repeat this wrong argument non-stop.
The difference between us and a worm is mainly the fact that our brain is much bigger, this is a somewhat important difference that has a pretty decisive effect, don't you think so?
box.
A response is on the way. Maybe my father blocked her because he is starting to be convinced of you...
box.
The meaning of your life is to lick the ass of the same creator you believe in. This belief has made you immoral, dishonest, a racist, a hater of the foreigner, a hater of opinion.
Unlike you, decide my life is mine, not "God's".
The basis of the story of Genesis is an ancient Babylonian story, in which the god Marduk creates man to serve the gods. I wouldn't want to live with if I thought I was someone else's tool.
You have been brainwashed. You were told, on the one hand, that you are a zero from zero, an ant that God can step on at any moment. And on the other hand - you are the splendor of creation, as a Jew you are the crème de la crème of humanity.
You were told to doubt everything scientists say - just a bunch of greedy fools. But - you must not doubt the Holy Torah. Although five minutes of reading Genesis shows you that it is mythology and nothing else.
It is not for nothing that it is written that the first sin is curiosity - knowledge is the enemy of religion.
Do not delude yourself that you have convinced someone here of the truth of the Torah, or that you have found a hole in the science. On the contrary - at least for me, the feeling that religion is nothing more than brainwashing only grew stronger.
Miracles
You are hurt by the bluntness.. by the immoral way I wrote.
I understand you.. You just didn't notice how you treat the Creator. During and throughout the discussion... you didn't stop. Despise the way of life
My. I'm just not going to copy all the language you've used so far.
But let's get more serious.
Is an accidental explosion of nature. Explain it how you will. This is something that is completely accidental according to the scientists. No planning. no purpose no nothing Can make you mad at a moron like me. Maybe you can explain to me where your casualties come from.
According to you, I am the continuation of the process and the cases of nature.
Therefore there is no difference between me and any worm in nature.
After all, you wouldn't bother to explain to a worm for a whole week that your way of thinking is correct.
In general, I still don't understand why it is so concerning for a person to draw some kind of abstract painting. What is it that touches a person so much if it is classical music or just a siren of an alarm.. What does a person strive for? What did nature do to him? This case process? Does it have a different role from the other animals? Does his life have meaning? Or just a coincidence that came to mind. And actually it's nothing. Gurnishet in Baidash
box.
And I tell you for the last time - your worldview is based on a combination of lies and stupidity.
I don't know what they did to you - but I think someone cut off your mind. Really, you are like a disk filled with sand...
You have proven yourself to be immoral. You have proven yourself ignorant. And now you've proven yourself a fool. If you have nothing to say then don't say nonsense..
Really, your world view doesn't fit here. This is a website of thinking people, and believe me Gauguin's statue does not describe you....
Forgive me for being blunt, but you crossed the line of good taste.
Miracles
Again.. I'm trying to explain to you the essential difference between your worldview and my way of life.
You assume that nature didn't plan anything, it just happened to him.
Let us imagine a huge creature of such enormous size that no device that we have the ability to detect it because of its enormous size and the space it occupies.. Now suppose it was constipated. Then the internal pressure within him released the material that was in his stomach, including the gases that were inside, at an enormous speed and energy that is beyond our comprehension. The first speed it got out of it in the first three seconds. She is so huge. Little by little the pieces of his feces began to connect randomly. And here you are and all the other scientists trying to logically explain how it happened.
Now explain to me what is wrong with this theory of the freak bang
that the Creator Himself
Miracles
This is not a renewal of what the Torah already teaches us without evolution.
"Rabbi Yochanan said: If the Torah had not been given, we would have learned chastity from a cat, and robbery from an ant, and lewdness from a pigeon."
In the animals it is ingrained.. they have no war between their desires and what is ingrained in them.. therefore they have no Torah.
Indeed, the main thing that distinguishes us from all of creation .. is that we belong to the desert species .. and like your language, grammar.
This is just proof that within nature there are morals and moral leadership. And also moral reasoning. And also moral reason. He is what I said.. the morality, logic and reason. They are not only the property of man. This is the rooted thing. promotes even before creation from the morning itself
box.
I suggest you start showing some of the common sense you talk about so much.
Not only must one live wisely and morally - there are people who do not have one of these things, morals, reason and, unfortunately, logic.
The only thing that distinguishes us from other animals is... grammar!! Lie to yourself as much as you want - without grammar we are not fundamentally different from chimpanzees.
box.
Some animals also have intelligence and morals. So your whole word-hashing is fundamentally wrong.
I would be happy to give you links to everything I said.
Again - you were talking nonsense...
"Because evolution alone could not by chance create intelligence." just wonderful.
http://thecolbertreport.cc.com/videos/n6wqjn/bill-o-reilly-proves-god-s-existence—neil-degrasse-tyson
Miracles
Inferior no. Different yes
for miracles
You agree with me that since nature is not intelligent. So there is nothing to look for in him either. Removed.
If I understood correctly, you are me and all the people in the world. Creatures of nature in your opinion. So where did we become masters of morality.. Secondly, because we are creatures of an irrational process, we faded from evolution. according to your method
Suddenly we invented something intelligent... man... and therefore for some reason he jumped. He has a concept that does not belong to nature at all. which is called morality. The same because you are a champion
In evolution... unless such a complex process is created. complicated. And very deep to understand. which is called intelligence.. true, true.. it does not seem so natural at first but it is definitely nature.. and now based on this theory.. we evolutionists must fight for enlightened morality.. because evolution alone cannot accidentally create intelligence. Because at the very core of nature there is no such thing. Neither morality nor reason. But we see that we have something like reason and morality. Inevitably .. we must adhere to the theories of evolution. So the only logic (oops another concept that doesn't exist in the nature of coincidences... logic... where did the logic come from.. It's not bad that this also has to be explained logically.
...) So wait, we need three things, one is logic... the second is reason.
So I will explain to you where logic springs from.. Logic springs from the wonderful structure of nature and the laws of nature.. which are interwoven with each other.. as the One who created everything with wisdom, reason and understanding. Because he is science and he knows... morality also comes from him.. because he is merciful who gives us the entire creation... and in every moment he is for us
the whole universe He is in His mercy.. He is the source of morality.. and the purpose of goodness. He is the source of reason.. that's the simple answer. The least pretentious. hard to digest But she simply explains that there is a primary source of reason for morality. and logic.
Shmulik
Box actually does an excellent job - he explains again and again how far he is from even understanding what morality is...
box.
Regarding the differences between a man and a woman, you are not only ignorant, you are a real idiot 🙂
The women are the ones who demand to compete only against women - are you really so closed off that you don't understand that?
Do women prefer taller men? I don't know if this is true, but it makes sense to me. I can think of several reasons for this. An average woman is shorter than an average man - and we know that beauty is usually the average of what we know (there are experiments that show that this is so - unlike you, I don't make things up).
Another option - a woman is looking for a partner who can protect her and her children. If you have a little understanding of the theory of evolution it is easy to understand that this makes sense.
Another possibility - this phenomenon is a result of culture/education. Think of the famous phrase - tall, dark and handsome.
And in any case - how is this related to inequality?
box.
Nature is not an intelligent being that can be approached with claims. Does the fact that a lion eats a deer seem moral to you? Is it moral that a hyena may die at every birth because of your body type? Does the fact that most animals are not allowed to breed seem moral to you?
Is an earthquake moral? tornado? cancer?
You don't really understand the meaning of the word "morality" and you are probably completely ignorant of understanding the processes of nature.
Out of the box.
So you agree that according to the Torah the woman is inferior to the man. That's what we wanted to hear.
So please - it's time for you to admit that you are less moral than us. Note - I don't blame you for this - but be honest with us and thank you.
After all, we wasted so many responses to get this out of you.
Miracles
If I were you, I would complain to nature. Despising the females. A lion has a few cows for health. to camel a few nakots. to travel. to give more and more.
In general, humans also have a defect of nature. The women are usually looking for a man who is taller than them for some reason.
Absolute discrimination in sports. Women's team, men's team. A division for women A division for men.. If I were a woman I would boldly turn to the Sports Council.. especially if I were K.
and demands to change the situation. Women should play basketball against men. And for there to be a real balance, the people have to start with an advantage.
In general, I would come with a claim to nature.. why only women have to go through pregnancy and then a difficult birth.. it is not enough that nature made them have a monthly cycle.. simply an imbalance in the cruelty of nature towards the female sex. And even more than that, the scientists in their resourcefulness instead of changing this reality. that women have to go through menstruation and pregnancy and childbirth. So they seem to be trying to make it easier for the woman. Easy birth. Easy pregnancy. And even manage to save all pregnancies. And even more than that, a woman accidentally got pregnant and she doesn't feel good about it. With great mercy they kill the cruel fetus
And others praise and say we alleviate the suffering...do something real, change nature. .. instead of supposedly easing the suffering.
Box, you bring examples from the Torah and say that the Torah does not need to be justified and is holy and absolute truth. You for some reason forget that the God who said Mashkah a male will die will for some reason create the same perversion according to the Torah's claim, in other animals as well. If it is a deviation, why did God create it?
The Torah is full of contradictions, you cannot give examples that support the moral side of the Torah but at the same time ignore the dark and horrible side of that holy Torah.
I recommend that you read the Bible word for word without interpretations and explanations of Sages because if the Torah is absolute truth why does it need interpretations and explanations for its words?
Miracles
As hard as it is to understand. All the conclusions that religion reaches. They are derived from the Holy Torah..if it is written that a woman was created from the man's rib, then so it was.
It's hard to understand and accept.
If we learn from the Torah that a woman is not allowed to testify. So it is so.
Hazal has some difficulties in learning the Torah.
But no one speaks out on the question of whether to keep the scriptures or not.
The difficulties are included in how to fulfill the scriptures and find why exactly this is how the Creator wants to fulfill his commandments.
On how to fulfill it belongs to the fulfillment of his mitzvahs. And on why it belongs to my mitzvah tastes.
The Torah does not come to justify. or stand equal against equals. …when it comes to science.
To begin with, it rises higher than higher than the understanding of the human mind. Whether the Torah is perceived as logical or not.
This is a Torah given to man created by his creator.
Regarding science, it changes and is transitory and not the same between periods.
After all, the science of the Egyptians is not the science of Greece and the science of Greece is not the science of the Middle Ages. and the science of the Middle Ages. Didn't even imagine today's science.
The medical science of China is not the medical touch of Europe. And more and more
Which is not the case with the Torah given by the Creator
It has not changed since it was given and will never change. And if the Torah says that there are differences between a woman and a man, then there is a difference. If the Torah says that Hina Yethera gave to the woman, then Bina Yethera was given to the woman. If the Torah reveals to us that Sarah was a greater prophetess than Abraham, then so be it. And at the same time if the Torah tells us that women should be light minded then it is so.
Out of the box.
I mean - you explain to me why the status of women is lower than that of men, at least in the matter of marriage.
And it's not just in marriage, after all, you explained that a man is saved first, because he can perform yota mitzvot.
And she is ineligible to testify because she is weak.
And we didn't talk about the fact that a woman can't be a rabbi, or even enter a synagogue as equal to men.
And all this seems beautiful and good and justified to you.
I'm right?
rival
I look forward to the bigger smile. In God's return the return of Zion. Then the weariness of our mouths and our tongues will be filled.
Out of the box,
You will make me smile the biggest when you announce that you have finally sobered up and abandoned the world of legends and nonsense.
It will truly be a joyful moment.
rival
I'm glad I brought you up
See how believing in imaginary things causes you unnecessary worries 🙂
Oh out of the box, you're funny 🙂
But thanks for the concern.
Miracles
Poor Shmulik
Treat him.
rival
For a moment I was afraid. Maybe because you're asking for a divorce. Then you will also receive.. but since you answered then. You probably didn't get the divorce.. Apparently the Creator has other plans for you..
I calmed down, thank God
Ministry of Education rating: Half of the most valuable schools - yeshiva and studios
http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-4568785,00.html
Miracles,
It should be remembered that everything that Kozva says is his own opinion and that he has never backed up a single claim in the link to confirm his words.
I brought a reference to the results that the Ministry of Education published (through the Ma'ariv newspaper).
Try to find out in front of him why a son should respect his father more than his mother.
Outside the box, answer what?
I didn't see you asked anything.
rival..
Rival.. you can answer a moment
Sorry but I did not agree to marry any God, I demand a divorce now and immediately 🙂
The divorce matter
It is a derived verb and as a result of marriage. After all, it is clear that a man who has not married a woman cannot divorce her.
He can make you a prenuptial agreement with a lawyer. And then in the event that they are going to separate, they fulfill the agreement.
But in Judaism there is another and essential issue. Marriage is a derivation of the status of Mount Sinai.. as they say as the religion of Moses in Israel..
I will explain myself. At Mount Sinai, the Creator chose us, who is the influencer, the breeder and provider for all. The Creator took us as a people under his wings and after the status brought us to his house in Jerusalem. The people of Israel are likened to the Creator's wife. The status itself is the sanctification that sanctified us. and separated us from the nations. The Creator even honors us above all nations. and take care of our needs. as a nation and as individuals. This is the way of life on which Israel stands, as strange as it may seem to you, but this is the religion.
When the Jewish man marries his wife, he learns from the Creator of the world how to do it. . He undertakes to feed and support and take care of all the woman's needs and brings her to his home.. similar to the actions of the Creator.
It is understood that we as a people are not able to cut ourselves off from the Creator who sustains us at any given moment.
Even if we try to commit suicide in peace. There is still the material reality that emerges at any given moment out of nowhere. I can imagine that I was disconnected from the Creator. But I may have disconnected from an imaginary creator that I made up. But you cannot disconnect from the real creator.
As the Sage wrote, "Israel, even though it has sinned. Israel is here the point corresponding to the divorce. A woman cannot give a divorce because Israel cannot secede.
But the Creator can also give a divorce
By the way, the exact words are get cut. Search and see what the concept of keret in the Torah is. It is a disconnection that the Creator decides to disconnect the Jewish people from him. And not the Jew.
That is why the concept of marriage and divorce in the Torah are taken from the concepts of the Torah itself and not some decision of some agreement.. In this respect it is also understandable why Chazel tells us that the marriage of a non-Jew is not called a marriage. Because they were not in the status of Mount Sinai and were not dedicated as a chosen people.. although according to the Torah the agreements between them are considered as any agreement of bills mentioned in the Torah. But it is not a marriage certificate. It is more appropriate to call it a marital agreement
Miracles
Regarding the answer about the divorce
In my humble opinion, I have already said it before. There is a fundamentally different world view angle between science and religion..
A. The foundation of the religion's foundations is that God exists. He does not have a body and does not have the likeness of a body, and he is not affected at all by all the actions of the prophets (more precisely, see Rambam chapter XNUMX)
B. Science, on the other hand, first refers to the reality that exists in front of it and based on its tests it makes assumptions. It does its experiments with the visible reality and reaches conclusions.
Apparently, the concept of divorce does not belong, but it does belong. Obliged by reality. We'll see later..
It is a thing derived from the religious concept to the scientific concept
A. According to religion there is a creator who influences every day always a new reality. (As it is written in the prayer. He who renews his goodness every day is always an act of Genesis) and enriches the whole world with his goodness with grace and mercy.
B. The way of science does not initially refer to the invention of a creator, it looks at the laws of nature as something that is understood by itself and always exists by virtue of being the substance of energy. Science examines and investigates persistently and in progress the nature and the universe that it can examine around it.
It is possible that I may not have been accurate in the beginning of the accuracy, but that's how it seems to be in the way of the difference from the basic point of view.
And now for the eyes of the divorcee..
Shmulik
Be sure he will explain to you that matriculation is not education, and that all seculars are prostitutes.
This is after he explains to us that the morbid divorce laws preserve the dignity of women.
But...he will probably teach us about probability first....
box.
Shmulik reminded me that I asked you about a divorce. I would appreciate your response - why can a man refuse, and a woman can't?
The stories about science and "probability" are not interesting now. Let's close the matter of morality. After all, that's the most important thing, isn't it?
Miracles,
http://m.maariv.co.il/news/new.aspx?pn6Vq=E&0r9VQ=GHDEI
We will see the box bring some data that will support something he says or for once answer one of your questions.
Has he already answered what you asked him?
Miracles,
http://m.maariv.co.il/news/new.aspx?pn6Vq=E&0r9VQ=GHDEI
We will see the box bring some data that will support something he says or for once answer one of your questions.
He is already with her
Miracles
Many scientists will be happy to hear what you say..probability is indeed an absolute truth... Alec
A probability of 0.2 is a probability accepted as a high probability regarding the freak bang. But still an inaccuracy of 0.2 percent.
If out of every thousand people there will be a chance that two will get a certain disease. Is it absolutely clear in medicine that these two will not be sick..
And if this is absolute truth. Let them use the right word.. but scientists who are true to themselves understand that a reality called absolute truth in the results of a scientific experiment does not exist. All the more so in theory... and all the more clever when there are other theories with different opinions. This savings is getting smaller and smaller.
And all the more so when you suddenly find a figure that didn't match the theory as it was before (like the distance of the stars from each other) that the probability is getting smaller and smaller..
In any case, you can decide in a miraculous way that probability is an absolute truth.
Like the word miracles
Miracles
There is no doubt that the army contributes to the people and again only a fool would think otherwise.
Despite the absolute belief in past generations. In our generation and in future generations of the people of Israel, the Creator works miracles. With all this, don't count on a miracle. That is, it is forbidden for a Jew to trust that the Creator of the world will make a change in the laws he established for him. Because it is subject to the sole decisions of the Creator. Therefore, it is clear that the contribution of the army is enormous.. and without the army the students of the yeshiva could not sit down and study Torah. After all, the Torah itself requires the creation of an army. "All military veterans from the age of 20"
"Take a thousand down a thousand down and go fight..."
.. On the other hand, this in no way belittles the contribution of learning the Torah to the people of Israel in particular and the world in general. The existence of this nation with this language (like the Nissim disease that still exists today) most of its existence was without an army. lasted nearly two thousand years. Despite various attempts at extinction. Only thanks to one thing and one thing only... the Torah of Israel... the most striking example is the Greekness... in our generation it is to my deep regret. The process of assimilation that takes place causes those who are not Torah and mitzvot observant. (that in order to keep them, you need to study the Torah... and teach. keep and do) This process of assimilation stems from a lack of awareness of his historical belonging to the people of Israel... and of course when you sit and study you grasp the main thing... that there is a Creator who chose us from all the nations and gave us His Torah. And his demand is and uttered in her day and night
box.
You are showing increasing ignorance - which is definitely a miracle.
Probability is definitely an absolute truth - as opposed to the nonsense you believe. The only thing that rivals your arrogance is your ignorance. I don't expect you to understand in science, I do expect you to understand already that you don't understand.
You don't want to study, so don't study - just stop talking nonsense...
Miracles.
Indeed, science is a method for studying the world. And she is the most successful we have. This is indisputable.. I also agree.. only a fool would think otherwise.
But again the investigation of the world is an investigation of an existing reality.. a final figure of and a final result that we are investigating. There is nothing wrong with that and besides that it even leads to many wonderful and good results.
but . Sometimes the theories of how we arrived at the result do not go with real data that exist in the world.
out of complete disregard. from the same data.
For example the word miracles or miracle. It means changing the natural systems. In a way that the laws of these systems do not work.. the use of this word.. itself contradicts science. The origin of this word is taken from written history thousands of years ago. In the holy language.. to this day when it comes to a scientifically inexplicable phenomenon it is called a miracle.. like the concept of a medical miracle.. or a walking miracle.
Also, although I don't understand probability, every idiot understands that probability is not an absolute truth.. as long as it is accepted by the majority.
We learned from this 2 things A. There is a probability that there are miracles above the laws of nature. Like the theories that today speak of a speed higher than the speed of light. . B. A theory is not an absolute truth
Box
The only conclusion we have come to is that you are a dishonest person.
A. Science is a method for studying the world, the only method that works.
A.1. You have no idea what probability is.
B. The proof of the absolute superiority of secular/national religious education over ultra-orthodox education is in the percentage of army recruitment. If you wish, we can also add the status of women in particular, and human equality in general - as signs of the failure of ultra-Orthodox education.
third. The same god that you constantly lick our ass (and for no reason) is, according to the books you believe in, a liar, a murderer, lacking in basic morals, a man-hater, and other shameful filth.
This is what you convince us…
So friend, by now we have reached the following dangers.
A. Science in general. And the scientific theories in particular. improve themselves. They are not absolute truth.. and there is probability and room for problems.
B. Secular education needs healing from its current state.
C. There is no other besides him, zero other than him
Good night
box
Explain the divorce thing to me again. I didn't understand your explanation.
Your stories about the wonderful orthodox education are really funny. Look at the result - a bunch of dodgers who think they are contributing something.
But - let's close the divorce issue.
It seems to me that the key sentence in the article is: "The rate of reported crime in the ultra-Orthodox sector".
Let's think, what percentage of crimes are reported to the police in the secular sector, and which in the closed and closed ultra-Orthodox sector?
rival
I will not forget a fact that will please you
http://www.kikar.co.il/%D7%A0%D7%AA%D7%95%D7%A0%D7%99-%D7%94%D7%A4%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%A2%D7%94-%D7%97%D7%99%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%9D-%D7%9B%D7%A4%D7%95%D7%9C-%D7%9E%D7%94%D7%97%D7%A8.html
Out of the box,
Do you know the percentage of atheists sitting in prisons in Israel?
Hint, zero percent.
In studies and literature surveys in the fields of activity of the Israel Police it is written...
In paragraph .. women and men and crime among them.
Write; Freda Adler was the one to claim and prove that due to the change in traditional gender roles, there has been a rise in crime rates among women... the new, male criminal takes more part in street crime, mainly in serious violent offenses...
In Israel it was found that 74% of female prisoners are Jewish and most of them are under the age of 35 (60%) for 44% of them this is their first imprisonment. Most drug addicts (53%) (Prison Service)
I read miracles
interesting..
But did they take into account that assistant teacher. in order to pay him. Good Jews travel around the world and extort money from good Jews and pay them salaries. Money not from the state, not from the Ministry of Education. Basically an addition
The oacd does not check that. The reason is simple, he checks data at the Ministry of Education. The Ministry of Education does not have this figure either. Because the Ministry of Education does not pay for a teaching assistant.
In higher classes, i.e. yeshivahs that correspond to my age in high school, the teaching is different... it's called friendship. Students sit and whitewash authorities by themselves. Develop their intelligence. pushing each other. And that's most of the day. In secular education, everyone sits and is herded like geese by the teacher. Their mind is passive most of the time. Of course there are among the students. Intellectual stimulation. He sends his friend an sms, he forwards a WhatsApp video to his friends. And listening to the teacher goes down and down. . The situation forces a solution when the exams are the ones you set.. and then there are innovative ideas.. copying the material...brilliant ideas.. after all, you need a living in the end..
box
And if you want to continue the discussion - explain to us why a man has the right to prevent a divorce and a woman does not. Here, too, will you bring a wish that this is for the benefit of the woman?
You talked about the ultra-orthodox education - and you ignored the fact that the most basic thing is not taught - morals!
Miracles,
In what context did you give the link, and how does it support the claim that orthodox education is less good than secular education?
In a quick glance at the page, it seems that it deals with a comparison between countries and not between sectors in the State of Israel, unless I missed the section in question.
Box
Understand - you are only burying yourself deeper and deeper in the mud.
You try to look for points of light in the darkness you live in.
Believe what you want - but your poor attempts to attack us just do you harm!!!
Please, leave it.
outside the box
Do you keep humiliating yourself? Enough already 🙂
The education system in Israel is really bad, and the worst part of it is the ultra-orthodox education.
Since you are ignorant - please read here
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.oecd.org/edu/skills-beyond-school/48631144.pdf&ved=0CDcQFjAJahUKEwjRh_TC5JzHAhURWogKHZfUC0c&usg=AFQjCNG_Fs8zA6Pn_0ULNEPH0C7uEKpBvQ&sig2=oOKTPHzXJEUYFDakBMntbg
According to the Halacha (Rambam) educational laws. A class with over 25 students. Need a teaching assistant.
Ifenza in the secular world. They can't even get 33 children to the class.. it's a parody, it's a joke.. and even then will the teachers control the class.. so now I tell you in the name of Halacha.. no.. it won't work.. remember. That's what Torah Emet says.
Now choose which is better, over 25 child needs an assistant or 33 child
And think carefully about the idea.. Isn't it painful that the law is right??!!
So far I have not received a single factual answer.
Parody!?..To be honest, gentlemen, to be honest, do 14-year-old girls in high school take drugs, and do what they do, etc. Yes or no?!.. To be honest, is there violence in high schools, yes or no.. Facts, gentlemen, facts.
Does a 13-year-old boy and another 15-year-old friend take money while threatening young children? Yes or no. Are you successful in trying to change education? Save these young souls... or you remain merciless towards them..
A little mercy..and
I find it hard to believe that such people really exist.
It's like a parody of converts
outside the box
You told about a soldier who messed up. Do you want me to write about soldiers who screwed up? Does this really seem related to the topic? Or is it a continuation of your usual method of ignoring the base.
K.
All these things are accepted in the society you live in... and they all work. solidity..
And there is no cruelty in this??????????
K.
Maybe explain to me. Why when girls dance during a basketball break do they have to move like belly dancers.. what does this add to their essential quality as women.. and this is acceptable for 14-15 year old girls.
And the funny thing is they still show it off
K.
The conscious and exploitative women you claim.
Check the world you came from.. Selling women to prostitution. Exploiting women in pubs while giving them drugs so they can exploit them..
Again even if a so-called religious person does this. Even if he has the longest beard, his punishment is more severe than in the secular world.
Taking advantage of little girls to be advertising dolls with the strange help of parents. And that is considered acceptable.
outside the box
You're just putting more nails in the moral coffin. You explain to me how immoral the God you believe in is, and along the way you show me that you are also immoral. Morality is between people, not a person and his God.
Understand - I did not ask you to be moral! You are the one who claimed that the ultra-orthodox are more moral than the secular. And now you explain to me why it's not like that.
Pay attention to the following question: an ultra-Orthodox woman and a heart surgeon are drowning in the sea - who do you think a secular person will save?
I would appreciate an honest answer from anyone reading...
K.
Decision in a situation of stress.. Tape
K.
More than a year ago, a soldier was killed. Terrorists entered from Gaza towards a base near Eilat. The first to notice them was a combat soldier. She didn't shoot at them and hid. That's why a soldier was killed. When asked why she didn't respond she answered.. I thought if I fight them what will it help when they kill me. That's why a soldier was killed.
She was neither judged nor punished for it.
It seems to me that if this was a combat soldier he would have been in prison a long time ago
Miracles
A Jew in certain situations has to give up what he owes in order to fulfill the divine will...himself!!! Himself ! Not a man or a woman.. He has to decide whether to die or bow down to a statue of star workers. The Torah commands him to die.. Where is the mercy???!!!
Why don't you ask about that? The reason to collide..
Miracles
Maybe the man is a heart surgeon.. maybe he is the next genius of physical science.
What the hell is this.. to come and say it's cruelty. who choose a man .. and if they save the woman first and the man drowns .. then what is not cruel towards the man???. But what is the purpose of hitting and not being mean... it's a shame and a very shame... and it seems to me that you didn't listen to my advice to read carefully..
For the same reason I compared a gay man and his partner. and a woman After all, if the gay will save his partner because of his judgment... is he a cruel gay... here is a situation of cold judgment. and unfortunate as well.. order of priorities. The priority of the Jew. He is the divine will.. You may have once heard of the concept of killing and not passing away
K.
Yes, there are also religious people who do such abominable acts.. for breaking it they are called complete evildoers and their punishment should be even more severe. What are secular because the secular are simply used to sexual promiscuity. And they do not represent anything in the moral sphere in this..
Proof of the word. Internet that any child in a secular home can log in and see..
K.
Did you hear about the drinker who was raped this week?
Both drunk and raped. Experience ah
K.
The Torah teaches us that there is an exception to every rule
In my opinion, you belong to the exception.. According to the Torah, it is not a woman's honor.
According to your answer, you may not have had a negative experience at all. Not at home, imprisoned outside, you probably haven't experienced any harassment.. but the surveys show that most women in Israel... in the secular world have experienced sexual harassment to varying degrees. Starting from bridal school at work.
This is not my invention.
K.
I didn't invent the association of a psychologist for women who have to go through hearings and committees.. in such situations.. follow the secular media.. and mainly women in the media are the ones who shout this cry..
Leave your delusions, you'll see yourself philosophizing.. I asked a question, what do you prefer to be appreciated because of your bare body.. or between who you really are..
Out of the box.
You answered what I knew a long time ago. I already told here that I heard a lecture by Amnon Yitzchak, and as soon as he said the answer, I stopped listening, and realized that I had to distance myself even further from Judaism.
I didn't ask about saving a family member in front of a stranger. I didn't ask too many people, but I am convinced that every non-religious person will save the woman. The reason is simple. Think for a moment - maybe the woman is pregnant? Maybe she's breastfeeding?
I put man before "God", and therefore I think I am more moral. Fulfilling mitzvot has nothing to do with morality, and that's your mistake.
K.
You came out a man
How about the death penalty for the rapist of another great-grandson.
According to your hatred for people who did such a thing.. you may be in favor. In any case, the most severe punishment in the law.
The Torah is in favor.. what do you say..
The secular world.
News now on Gali Chahal 16.00
A fifty percent increase in the use of drugs in the army
Probably because of the ultra-Orthodox who were added
box,
Are you that arrogant or stupid to think that all women are the same? For your information, there are women for whom the opportunity to stand, for example, in front of the "rabbi" who raped them and testify against him, without a screen and without mediation, is the best medicine they can receive in order to regain a little stability and security that was undermined by that pig. I don't know what I would want in such a situation, but for sure I would not want a group of men to be the one to decide what is good for me because of their prejudices about women, not to mention misogyny that stems from fear. Are you really so heartless and spineless that you come up with inclusive and sweeping laws established by men and simply erase the ability to decide and freedom of choice in matters that primarily affect them? Is there really no limit to the vileness you are willing to base yourself on, and the hypocrisy you are willing to be a part of? It is evident from your responses that there is indeed no such limit. The truth is that you disgust me, filled with ignorance, filled with dishonesty, filled with broken logic in almost every argument, including the requested assumption regarding the very existence of an intelligent creator for the world, each of these constitutes a thought pollution in itself, but this poison (wrapped in the words of a specter, what which only increases the evil) of the religious reality, and the ultra-Orthodox in particular, where women are excluded, exploited, objectified, in a fantastic demonstration of the most primitive standards befitting a religion that is thousands of years old, this is an evil that must, but simply must pass from the world!
I have read many of your comments, there is not a single one that has contributed anything to the site on science issues, you are not here because you are interested in science nor because you are interested in a rational intellectual discussion on any subject, you are here with one simple purpose and that is to spread the Torah in "pleasant ways" Aalek, in an ugly attempt to perform The most humiliating theft that exists - plagiarism. Even if you wanted to, you wouldn't be able to contribute anything of value here because you have neither the knowledge, nor the curiosity, nor the integrity nor the minimum moral level required for a discussion on such a site.
You explained that the purpose of your life is to fulfill the mitzvot and you also explained well why you and your ilk do it - out of fear of God, in simple words because if you don't do it you will be swallowed by that "loving father", in short you believe in a violent (and imaginary) bully who blackmails you with threats in the most explicit way possible, And even when you try to be the best you can, he still (according to your belief) attacks you left and right, what is an attack, kills you in the most horrible ways imaginable, from cooking a baby left in the car by some ultra-Orthodox to the Holocaust, And you, like the cliché of a battered woman, continue to defend the devil and blame yourselves (roughly, because in fact you place the blame mainly on the secular, and most of all on the homosexuals). In essence, this is what you represent - an idolater who has enslaved himself to Satan and clings to him more and more the harder he seemingly hits him. So you chose your own punishment, that's your right, but what are we guilty of?
Pay close attention
Indeed the great failure of the secular system. Expressed in both education and demographics.
The young people must first be convinced to have more children, certainly more than the religious society. And the reason is simple. In secular society, the beneficiaries are happily encouraged. Those who can bring babies into the world but avoid doing so due to fulfilling their desires driven by genetic traits. And of course in this way increase the amount of the beneficiaries. So you have to make up for the shortcoming.. and also bring the ones that are prices.
Second, the young people need to be convinced to have more babies, even though it will harm their personal careers.
Otherwise, oh my.
Another problem in education is that the importance of don't be murdered should be raised more.. from abortion.. to murder in a discotheque.
They should also be educated not to take drugs or alcohol that lead to murder. and killing on the roads. And it is known that drugs reduce the need for childbirth..
There is another problem is the age of marriage. In other words, the younger you get married, the more children you have. That's why you have to convince people in their twenties to get married at an early age. and abandon the secular purpose. career. money and material comfort.
Also, we need to start educating to repeat with another question the movement and momentum of repentance. It also makes it difficult and brings down the sinners among the secular world... we need to find a substitute for what the Torah gives... and it must not be drugs. Because the Torah is called Tsem Ha'im...
But what to do that at this stage the pure old religion is more wise than the modern idea (from Madron's language) the enlightened (which says please in the divine light).
If the two are your beloved daughter and a stranger you don't know and happens to be swimming in the area, who do you save?
Thanks to the whole example of a box, it is possible to substantiate the claim that the ultra-Orthodox have no morality.
I must point out that it is extremely difficult to read the basic and deep paternalism present in his words. Fortunately, in large parts of the Western world, the next generation will not understand at all what the uproar is about (about women's rights, LGBT people) and the problem will disappear by itself. In Israel I am very pessimistic because the big law of numbers works in the favor of a box. Think about the fact that a dozen of his children are growing up to think that such chauvinism is logical and we the secularists are not really doing a proper repair job: neither in demography nor in education (who among us bothers to emphasize the idea of equality between the sexes on a daily basis?)
creepy
Miracles
So the primary basis is that there is a creator and there is a created. The same Creator gave instructions to the creature. The true desire of the creature is to fulfill the will of the blessed God.
Moreover, as completely as possible. In the Torah there are three (613) mitzvot for men, and for women there are fewer mitzvot for the rest.
The existence of the entire world is based on the commandments and their existence.
(At Mount Sinai we are taught that the Creator imposed Mount Sinai on the people of Israel and said to them. If you keep the Torah, it will be good if you don't.. here you will die) .. that is, the purpose is to keep the mitzvot. .
In the above case a very cold decision is required because there is no other choice to choose between the one who can fulfill more mitzvah and the one who mitzvah with less..
Now I will ask you a question that you would ask a gay man..
His partner is drowning in the sea and next to him is a woman whom he will save..
The gay's priorities will be emotional and not cold.
Even doctors at the time of an attack are faced with difficult decisions. With you, their cold decisions will be acceptable. Because in the order of the world in which you live, the Creator will be hidden from you.
Miracles I will continue
Miracles
Thanks for your persistence on this question. But such a fateful question concerning human life. In the way of soul law, it really requires a long and complex answer.
Because from the practical side I have not encountered such a question in the past. On the mobile side. (while in formation for the pilot course we were asked a more complex question if there were four similes with each of the similes superimposed on its friend) in the above case and thanks to you I allowed myself to find out the mobile answer.
But first
I will ask you to treat the answer in depth and with the same seriousness that you invested in the question
First, according to what I clearly did, the halacha states in this case to save the man first.
And I will explain the complexity and taste of the matter.
The basis starts from the foundation in Judaism that there is a creator for the world. when he created man. gave him orders to do. Sages teach us that the Torah begins with the word Genesis, it speaks of Genesis, that the world was created for Israel, who are called the first, and for the Torah, which is called the first.
In the chapters of Avot it is written that I was not created except to be used by Koni
Out of the box.
Poor attempt... I asked simple questions. You repeatedly refuse to answer them - and lie with a determined forehead that there are no quibbles in your way of life. Are you lying to yourself too?
Come on - a woman and a man are drowning in the sea. Who are you saving? I ask for a one word answer. I will not comment on anything beyond one word. After that you can ask me whatever you want, and maybe you will realize that I have contributed much more to the Jewish people than you will ever contribute.
But come on - man or woman? Just one word.
Miracles
And you, like me, were probably born into a world whose relationship to religion is uncertain.
And you chose to ignore a simple question. Is there a purpose to your life? Or have you come to the conclusion that the purpose of your life is to fight the Jews who believe in the religion of Israel.. Apparently the evolutionary process for some reason created this obsession in you. And this is the purpose of your life. To make the world better without the Jewish religion. Actually the word Jewish Judaism is a derogatory word. Maybe you should delete this concept altogether.. because as long as it exists the "virus". This.. wait .. wait it sounds familiar to me... let me remember.. wait.. oops where does it sound so familiar..
Miracles
There is a big difference between the way of life I chose. to the way of life you live.
The world view is simple and has no ambiguity. The Torah is an absolute truth given by the Creator of the world. including the creator and creator of man.. This Torah was given to Moses our Lord and passed down to our generation.. It has instructions on how and what the Jew should do in his daily life. From waking up to sleeping.
I freely chose this path.
Over the years I came to know more. in such a way that it clicks and sounds. Not only is this way more correct. more real. But only the manufacturer himself, the creator, could have conveyed in such a wonderful way. Some
Details regarding the Torah's treatment of the woman's testimony can be found here. http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/kitveyet/sinay/edut1-4.htm
Out of the box.
Again... you don't answer my question. I'm asking simple questions, aren't I?
Miracles
The Torah in the Gemara refers to situations in which the woman's testimony is acceptable and when it is not.
I would be very happy if you would come to the Yeshiva and study.
You will be surprised to see angles that are not familiar to you.
Out of the box.
You didn't answer me 🙂 But I understand that the answer is positive, am I right?
Miracles
I have been working under a woman for thirty years or more...my wife...and happily
In a school where my daughters study who decides. This is the management of the school, all women.
By the way, there are subordinate male employees under them.
There is a charity named Yamima. that we were privileged to have been in our time. Many in the country study her Torah religiously and those who adhere to religion. Have you heard any ultra-orthodox rabbi speaking against a method? her study.
outside the box
Then answer me another question - would you be willing to let women choose to testify or not?
outside the box
Answer me - are you ready to work under a woman?
Out of the box.
When the community you are a part of does and does and you deal with protecting it here instead of complaining within it when it does wrong things and making sure that these things stop and do not become part of the routine of life in this community, who do you think you are hurting?
Regarding general social security
Turns out it's a painting at the station. Maybe in Bnei Brak or something like that..
From the point of modesty, the members of the KOPH were probably careful to draw something that was obviously not realistic.
A. All children are missing a finger on each hand.
B. In playgrounds the mothers are with the children... go to the field in Mea Shearim. and in Bnei Brak. And while ultra-Orthodox communities. You will not find a single man among them.
Why the KOPH advertisers decided to draw such a stupid thing is no longer up to me... the truth is that I don't feel obligated either. to the stupidity of others
K.
Or maybe the boy is taller than his sister, so it's easier for him to reach.
K.
Regarding the photograph of the boy climbing without shoes on his sister..
It occurred to you that the girl was afraid to go up lest she fall on top of him. And the preference is for him to go up
K.
second question. Would you rather be appreciated for who you are...or be appreciated for your bare body structure
K.
The topic discussed is women ineligible to testify.
Since you are a woman, I will ask you a rhetorical question.
And be honest with yourself.. What do you think a raped woman prefers? that she will undergo two and a half investigations and the pressure of the investigation in the manner required and demanded and investigated thoroughly
...or the investigation will be carried out to the core without being brought before the judge. and the rest of the people. And she will have to re-describe the ordeal she went through... and without taking her testimony at all...
Please be honest.
Miracles
As I told you there are 2 reasons. Being invalid.. I emphasize invalid for testimony
One for the protection of the woman. The demand to disqualify her so that they don't find excuses that have no choice must in the case of Flonchamao Palamoni be brought to testify.
And the second being invalid from the less positive side is that the pressure of the investigation can sway her from her testimony.
Fact See how many battered women think they are guilty. When you sped up that their smelly partner is to blame. How can they deny the truth about themselves. If not considerations not objects cause it
Miracles
good week..
First I brought Golda Meir. As an example.. because
A. A female testimony of the woman, if you look closely at her history. This is a strong woman with special virtues until she reached the highest rank in the country. Prime Minister
B. She admits that she did not stand up to the pressure
third. Her mistake resulted in the most difficult war that our people had since Kom
State.
Unfortunately, if you are not smart enough to understand, I could give you many examples.
As an example, you will find out what happened to the graphologist from the Demniuk trial after the pressure of the investigations she was under.
Shmulik
I can imagine Tony Soprano "asking" (so he called it a box) one of his friends to kill his son to prove loyalty....
Miracles,
I agree though there is a qualitative difference between the death penalty and life extension.
In any case, God as a loan shark from the mafia is an amusing image!
Shmulik
Even a lender with interest from the mafia will offer you to pay on time "for the sake of prolonging your days". I understand it as a threat, not a reward.
In my opinion, Haredim by definition cannot be moral. This is because their every action stems from either a fear of punishment or a desire for reward (in order to prolong your days...). Since the basis of morality is personal responsibility and with them everything is subject to the laws that the big brother in heaven passed on to them, their actions are not moral.
I'm not saying they can't be good people. Definately not. Some of them are much better than me, but the way they behave cannot be called a moral way.
K.
After that, the ultra-Orthodox think they are moral... Kouska knows very well that we are right, it's not just that he doesn't answer me...
And another small example of preserving the dignity of women in the ultra-Orthodox world:
https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/11816876_10152986337646121_7912725821203146324_n.jpg?oh=008cdc8173d7e97ee6f47750c88d03d1&oe=563C751F&__gda__=1447175776_f987458c84e7240b47477cb8a32997c8
https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xaf1/v/t1.0-9/s720x720/11855886_1620909354846816_2576201722194549781_n.jpg?oh=175cc2123979e8d9c57253ee46579d7a&oe=56809307&__gda__=1446871051_7e269cca4fd2179a41dcbdcaebb8307d
outside the box
Bullshit! The woman is not "resolved from evidence". She is wrong!!!
The very thought that a woman is weak is only intended to preserve the woman as inferior. You always take point examples that are not related to the matter.
I asked you about the two drownings - why don't you answer?
I will ask another question - would you be willing to be subordinate to a woman in your workplace?
simple questions. Will I get answers?
By the way, the explanation of the first reason has not yet passed the censor's approval as usual
Miracles
Second reason. This is the pressure that the woman is under. can bias her from the testimony of the most prominent example that led to this disaster, the testimony of Gold Meir in the Agrant Committee "It's not good for me, I couldn't stand a confrontation with the head of AMN or the Chief of Staff".
Miracles
Regarding a woman who is ineligible to testify briefly, there are 2 main reasons, the rest are secondary.
The positive one is intended to protect the woman from the pressure required of her during the interrogation. Some time ago, the media rose up in an outcry about the way in which they interrogated the raped woman... even though they needed her testimony to find out the credibility, with all this they attacked those who interrogated the woman. And they tried to fine-tune them on how and what should be investigated... More than once and twice they explain. in the media about the enormous difficulty and humiliation that the woman has to go through. This makes it difficult for her not only in the area of sexual abuse but in other areas. And sometimes she even needs psychological treatment because of this. Therefore initially in order not to hurt the woman. The Torah even rules. And does not give an opening to harm the woman's modesty and that there will be no excuse to harm her. They determined that a woman was ineligible to testify
one…
Box
Stop confusing your brain. Also tell me there are 4 mothers and only 3 fathers.
A woman is ineligible to testify. Is it not enough to explain Judaism's attitude towards women?
Question - a woman and a man are drowning in the sea and you can save only Aled - who do you save?
Miracles
Do you know one of the tastes associated with a woman ..which is why all the ultra-Orthodox doss eat dairy food once a year..
Only one.. Help Shmolik Baiitan.. maybe in K. that she is a woman. She must know
Miracles
Or it opens..
Your response is very interesting. Please give me a holiday that all our people celebrate. Women and children. Thanks to women. And that he is not religious.. Please one holiday
Miracles
I wrote a long response. showing the religion's treatment of women. For now she is. On hold..again. For some reason …
Shmulik
I like the fact that the religious "protect the woman". They have an excuse for everything….
box,
What do you think about the permit to rape a beautiful woman?
Out of the box
You think it is justified to discriminate against women - in my opinion you are a vile person.
You. Represents everything that is bad in religion, and especially in Judaism - you are arrogant, lacking integrity, sexist, homophobic, lacking basic morals and lacking basic knowledge.
Dogari - I don't like talking to you.
outside the box
I don't know... but there is a religious branch in the prison, and there is no "atheist" branch.
Out of the box
How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
What is your response to the topic?
How many ultra-Orthodox members of the Knesset went through prison? Do you think it belongs to the topic?
Haredi society discriminates against women in a horrific way. You justify it with all kinds of excuses out of your ass - but, bottom line, you think it should be that way.
In addition, you are homophobic, and you are far from being a person of integrity.
To me, you are the embodiment of everything that is bad about religion.
Miracles
Some ultra-Orthodox men are in prison for murdering their wives.. or their partners.
Miracles
How can I respond with every response checking me
Miracles
Good Morning.
What do you say about the lucky article "Superior intelligence was given to a woman" is this discrimination or an advantage. Or "whatever Sara says to you listen to her voice". Or "thanks to righteous women, the children of Israel were redeemed from Egypt". A whole scroll is studied in such a way that thanks to what this scroll was, the people of Israel celebrate the happiest holiday of the year. Purim holiday. When Adar enters, they multiply with joy. So much so that it is written that all holidays are void for the future to come except for Purim and Yom Kippur. Sages teach us that Yom Kippur is only like Purim. Thus, a greater improvement even than Yom Kippur. A whole scroll is named after a woman. You know "Esther". The thing that everyone expects is the Messiah. The purpose of creation in the Torah came from the power of a woman. Also a scroll that is carefully read on the great holiday of Matan Torah, the day on which the Creator of the world will be revealed to all the people of Israel, so much so that we are taught that it is fortunate that there was not and will not be such a great event again. And on this day indeed
The great and the terrible choose us. A scroll named after a woman from the scroll of Ruth. Solomon's greatness is thanks to his mother's wife "with the crown that his mother adorned him with" "In the future a woman will turn a man" and her virtue over the man will be revealed. Etc. etc'
Please stop with the cliché of the woman's superiority over the man. Who do we have in secular history .. Hannah Senesh .. Anne Frank. Golda Meir." Is it thanks to him that we have some kind of holiday that all the people of Israel celebrate for decades or single years or one year. seriously. what do we have mother's day.??!! Once a year we buy a gift for horror. The Jew has every day. On Mother's Day, honor your father and your mother and not just for the sake of prolonging your days. And there are complete laws on how one should respect the mother. ..one of the conditions was to place his palms on the floor so that he would not step on the floor before putting on her shoes. And Hazal teaches us that he has not yet begun to observe even one bit of the mitzvot of honoring father and mother.
And what did secular education bring us? A daughter rose up in fear to marry her mother-in-law.. The husband undertakes to respect his wife as his own body.. and not to send her to an institution for battered women. The real reason is that it hurts and humiliates her dignity.. Seriously, the Torah is full of positive attitudes towards women.. Look where they brought the daughters of Israel in the secular world. New to the critics, we find in the news about all kinds of drugs that are pushed to women .. selling women to prostitution .. it happens in Israel .. and it does not come from the religious sector. Go check it out. Where does this lead.. enough company to be real. Look at the face of the good and educated youth of the secular world. Drugged drunks violent rapists. Poor children
who see violence all the time on the Internet on TV. What do they do, do they get up in the morning and sit and study until kosher at night. like in meetings. No, they are enlightened, they get up in the morning with the TV on and see the Power Rangers accepting each other. and continue in practice at school. And then everyone opens their cell phone while the teacher is talking, who's even listening...come on, be honest with yourselves
rival
You might enjoy:
http://sixdays.org/the-butterfly-is-god-s-design
rival
please
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/caterpillar-butterfly-metamorphosis-explainer/
rival
As soon as I can I will send you a link to the topic. I don't know the percentage, but I know there is a stage of enzyme action on the larval protein. Even so, the larva is not solid, so it is not such a sharp transition.
The larva does not become a uniform liquid, but there is a re-organization of the proteins.
He may be a pathetic liar, that's beside the point. The caterpillar argument is not his, like the replicating car stupidity.
You really don't need to be afraid of him 🙂
outside the box
Now you explain to me why you discriminate against women?
You are a very small man to me.
Outside the box is fine, if fatigue overwhelmed God after 6 days and he had to rest, then you are allowed too.
(Almighty God needs to rest lol, maybe he's not really omnipotent?)
Miracles
I'm sorry but the fatigue is overwhelming me
I will continue to answer your question tomorrow.
Nissim, it's a shame in my opinion that you are in a hurry to provide "reinforcements" for his delusional claims, from now on he will take the article you gave here as conclusive proof of the truth of his claims about a cocoon that turns into a liquid.
The things you wrote are very vague, could you provide a full quote of the passage in which the words were said? Because I'm in fast transit I didn't find anything like that, second thing - what percentage of the larva's body is dissolved into liquid, 20%? 50%? 70%? I don't believe that at some point you will open the cocoon and it will only contain liquid, there will always be some solid body that is in a transitional stage between a caterpillar and a butterfly.
Again, please provide a quote of the passage where the words are said, because I have the feeling that the words have been taken completely out of context.
Miracles,
What is not understood? A woman gives birth and is therefore ineligible to testify.
It's scientific
Have you checked what is allowed to be done to a woman with a title during war?
Miracles
Regarding your question, a woman is ineligible to testify. I will try to answer to the best of my ability and precisely scientifically. at least in part. according to the spirit of the place.
Between the man and the woman there is a fundamental change in their role in the world which is expressed in the most fundamental thing. You created life.
The man gives the sperm. The beaver woman picked up the child. The construction is generally done by creating many details step by step.
Box
Where are the answers? I am not interested in stories that are not related to the topic.
And if you think you respect women then you too become a liar. What exactly is a "woman ineligible to testify" - do you want to continue the lie that it is meant to protect the woman?
rival
There is a stage where enzymes dissolve the cocoon proteins. Not completely, and there are components, "discs" in the article, that serve as a morphological basis for the larva.
There is also a mama in scientific american about it
In any case - possibly a liar.
Miracles
I will tell you a story
My dear wife's name is Esther. One day the teacher calls my wife. telling her
-Esther, I didn't know you were also called Malka
-what. Suddenly, my wife answers her - my name is just Esther. How did you come up with my name Malka.
-Today we asked each and every girl to say. Your name is mother. And your daughter said Esther Malka.
When the daughter returned home, my wife asked her why she told the teacher that her name was Malka
- What mom - Beiti answered her - dad keeps calling you queen.
This is an answer to your question about the behavior of the religious towards their wives.
The Torah outlines and guides every step of the blood's behavior from the moment its eyes open. And until the moment he goes to the tongue.
There is no justification for negative behavior, etc
And surely the Torah does not justify it. And of course this is not religious behavior
Not that I say about myself that I always behave according to the Halacha. I really hope to reach these lofty requirements. And I am making an effort. Your problem is with the behavior of people and not with the requirements of the Torah. You are not the only one, God also expects a person to overcome his weaknesses and improve his path.
And this includes the benefits.. As hard as it is to accept it is one of the requirements of the Torah. And it is included among all the difficult leaderships required of man
Shmulik
Well, you received an answer from miracles
Miracles,
I went through a large part of the first article you brought:
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0001736
And I didn't find any trace of the claim that the caterpillar at some point becomes all liquid, could you please quote the passage in question to make life easier for us? Thanks.
Strong,
Did you read the two links that Nisim brought before? (The first message on this page) What do you think is written in them?
Unfortunately I haven't had time to read them yet.
Out of the box,
You have only one mistake, the creator of the world does not want anything - he simply does not exist.
rival
if you please . I will take the 358 as a slur that I said the word Messiah
You asked about what is meant by soon.
I said I couldn't give you a definite time. . And I believe he will come today. In order not to enter into idle debates, I do not expand on the reasons and reasons for this..
Regarding the progress in technology and scientific innovations that are huge in quantity as well as quality. They are raining down on us at an unstoppable pace.
Just as the Holy Zohar says that in the sixth millennium the springs of wisdom will be opened. And he learns this from the miraculous story of Noah.. so does the Rambam write over 800 years ago. A year that in the future the good will be found with many delicacies found as dirt. And there will be no jealousy and there will be no competition.. We are already starting to feel the breeze of this era. Also the age of man as it is said that in the future .. the 120 year old boy will die .. it is about a reality that a person will be as young as a boy at the age of 120. Even now the wings of longevity are waving at us.. by the way.. I remember when I used to tell people thirty years ago. that humans will live eternal life. I received almost identical responses from scientists.. delusional, wild imagination.. nonsense and the like.. Today it is mentioned in science futurism books..
It is true that you blame this on the scientific development of humans.
None of the prophets said how it would look and how it would happen. Furthermore, Rambam writes in the story of the strong hand, the laws of kings, chapter XNUMX, they went first there.. that we don't know how the situation will be until it happens. Now that this halachic promise is beginning to take shape, we see how the creator of the world wants to clothe it in the boundaries of the world.
And it is precisely the Creator who dresses it in the boundaries of nature, however it seems so at this stage
Maybe, I understand you are ignoring me too?
I asked you very succinct questions, would you mind addressing them?
Your avoidance of anyone who exposes your lies may appear to the innocent reader as a silent admission.
I will ask again:
Why do you believe there is a liquid phase before the butterfly emerges from the cocoon?
Why do you believe that pictures of the far side of the moon that were first published in 1959 and most recently in the Haaretz Hayom newspaper, were hidden from the public?
Why don't you need evidence?
maybe…,
"How can a liquid randomly develop into a perfect butterfly"
You are right it is impossible! The real question is where did you hear this lie that the caterpillar turns into a liquid?
Perhaps you will finally tell us where you heard this nonsense, and why you insist that it is true?
Aren't you willing to tell us?
Miracles,
According to the box, they are born LGBT but have to deny their natural tendencies and live as straight. The Torah is also really sociable in this matter, as can be seen from the response of a box (a friend, even though...). You know, forgiving like that.
so no. According to the Torah it is to return to the closet or to return to the closet.
Two comments:
1. What does this say about the God of a box? Is he some kind of sadist who creates urges for people whose fulfillment is punishable by death?
2. It's interesting to see that Box accepts the fact that this tendency is innate. This is already progress. The next generation will no longer understand what the hell these religious people made such a fuss about and the matter will simply end by itself
It's possible..
what did we say You are caught in a lie - you confess, apologize and move on.
You said there were no photographs - so we saw that there were.
You said that there is no way to explain the transition from liquid to butterfly - so we saw together a study that nicely explains how it works.
So go ahead - confess the lie, apologize and move on.
Out of the box,
358 in geometry is also suitable for
No it does not seem to me
decay
murderous
Acceptance is shit
Enough of that already
quack
Allah is a mouse
What do you think about this ?
outside the box
I did not understand what you were saying.
Intervene, yes or no?
And regarding homosexuals - I really didn't understand you. On the one hand you say, rightly, that they were born that way. On the other hand, you don't respect it?
Are they the extremists?? Have you seen what an ultra-orthodox person looks like? Have you seen how they preach constantly? Have you seen how they treat their women?
What are you talking about?
Miracles
First you need to apologize for the slurs.
So no need for photography...
How a liquid can randomly evolve into a perfect butterfly which
Able to pass on to future generations the entire chain of past incarnations?
Only a weak mind of the kind to think that it is possible...
Out of the box,
If it is impossible to measure this time accurately and not even closely, then why do you say "soon"? What does it mean then? If it happens in 270 years will it still be considered "close" to you? And if in 500 years?
"But there is no doubt that science is in its most special period since its existence"
I agree with you, science is indeed in its most special period since its existence (and I'm glad you read books on the subject, I also read a little) and I agree with your assessments on the matter, but all this happens thanks to scientific research and thanks to the scientific method, don't give the credit for it To your imaginary god, he has nothing to do with it.
You have the right to believe with complete faith in what you want, but you are wrong and living in illusions. I did define this belief as complete nonsense, because that is exactly what it is.
I allow myself to take the 358th response
Miracles
Regarding the benefits... or what I wrote is not clear.
A. Their sexual orientation is not a matter of choice, they were born with it, a fact.
B. According to the Torah, every person is born with inherent qualities and tendencies.
third. There are those whose inclination is very much in a certain direction. Like, for example, a child who is born smart. And as soon as he is small, it becomes evident in him. But at the same time he was born with a tendency to steal.. (there are some for whom it is really a disease) If he lets the tendency to steal direct his actions, that wise man can be the most sophisticated cashier in the world..
After all, it is clear to anyone with a mind that when that thief is caught, they will not let him go because he is a genius. He will be punished despite being a genius.
He can even use his genius to steal the minds of mankind.. and even become prime minister. and even build the Hollind project.
The same goes for many traits that are accepted as negative in society .. excessive greed .. hypocrisy .. sexual deviations .. lust to destroy and kill .. and so on.
The Torah warns those who were not born... I emphasize that it was not by choice. With these qualities.
She tells us, friend even though you were born this way you have to overcome your disadvantage. Because you were created in such a way that you have the strength and ability to overcome.
And there we are given the free choice whether to overcome or not.
Unfortunately, the society in which people with the characteristics of benefits are born today. She gives it a goshpanka. No more, she encourages it.. It is precisely in this action and in this education that they are denied the free choice.
Miracles
Who is afraid of intervention?
About an hour ago I put my whole family on a plane.. We are a big family to spread out all over the USA, Panama, Mexico and the surrounding area to look for a kangaroo fossil for you. I told them each would get a thousand dollars a year if we found the kangaroo. If not, then we earned a fun trip. Enjoy
rival
I believe with complete faith that it will happen today. But if Hu procrastinates, I will wait for him every day..
All this is in the realm of faith and there is no scientific measure for it, you will surely agree with me...
The truth is, the answer was mainly intended for..maybe..
Because we consider the same things (if I'm not mistaken, you are the one who defined it nonsense as your language)
So measuring an exact or even approximate time does not belong. For this, if God wills, he will reveal himself in a prophecy to a certain person and reveal to him.
But there is no doubt that science is in its most special period since its existence.. new and wonderful discoveries every day. In every field.. a process leading to a situation where the person will no longer have to work by himself. The length of his life will reach the times mentioned at the beginning of Genesis. The good will be found a lot.. The development of energy tends to green energy. Actually we have no choice, the situation will get better.. you should read the book History of Tomorrow.. by the way this future situation was already prophesied about by the prophets about two thousand years ago when it was not even in the possession of a utopia. Today it is a reality taking shape around us..
outside the box
Do you think people are gay/lesbian by choice?
If not - then you show your ignorance (not that it renews anything).
If so - you are showing your wickedness (not renewing anything either
..)
We will all be happy to hear from you. And regarding the intervention - donate the money to the body of your choice. Ready to get involved now? I'm serious - we'll do it properly through a lawyer.
What do you think?
outside the box
I don't understand - you are afraid of losing by betting 🙂
outside the box
Where in the Torah does it say that I shall not lie? God already lied in the story of the Tree of Knowledge, don't you know that too?
may be…
Now, are you coming back?
may be…
Here is the link to the study that explains what you are trying to say:
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0001736
may be…
Here is the link to the study that explains what you are trying to say:
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0001736
The "problem" you mention, although it's funny that I bring a source and you don't, is that enzymes break down the proteins of the caterpillar and it does become liquid. It was not known, at the time they wrote the Scientology book you "quote", how the butterfly "remembers" its past.
This study explains the mechanism, and if you want, I will bring you follow-up studies that explain better.
Because your reading comprehension is poor (it's a shame I'm going to tell you to take proper medication... ) here is a series of photos that show how it works, but first read the research.
http://www.wormspit.com/pernyi.htm
Out of the box,
"Soon there will be a very strong mutation in science that will stand firm. And store all the accumulated scientific knowledge and say honestly. there are none but Him…"
Dreaming is good, but it's a fantasy that unfortunately will never come true.
By the way, can you define what "soon" is? Another 10 years? Another 30 years?
Because I think we've been hearing this for at least 70 years ("Soon the Messiah will come and redemption will come...").
Possibly
Greetings
You may be right. in this detail
But it seems to me that there are other, stronger reasons.
The theoretical structure as more researchers in a certain field discover more details that progress along the same basic line of inquiry. Or initial on which they started the idea.. Today the fast evolution of evolution has developed in many directions that even Darwin did not dream about in his wildest dreams. He started with an idea. Today is evolution. It exists even in the concept of the development of science and the like.
My worldview is as I said before. That everything God created was not created except for His glory.
And if you follow the evolution of science. Soon there will be a very strong mutation in science that will stand firm. And store all the accumulated scientific knowledge and say honestly. there are none but Him…
Then it will be the whole world's business to know God.
It's possible..
I see that the treatment returned the keyboard to a balanced state and with minimal side effects.
Could you please answer the questions I asked?
may be…
The reason the scientific establishment continues to champion Darwin's theory is endless proofs of its correctness, and not a single refutation.
Life was not created by random mutations, this is claimed only by a person who understands nothing about evolution, natural selection is not random at all and is the heart of the evolution process, I suggest you read a book or two on the subject.
Out of the box,
You are right, I really read the message quickly due to time pressure and did not understand it correctly.
So thanks for the clarification.
Out of the box.
This time a comment for you,
One of the reasons that the scientific establishment continues to champion Darwin's theory
Despite countless proofs of its failure,
that the religious prefer the existing situation, which has ambiguity,
confirms that science will deal with the investigation of truth,
And that life was not created by random mutations...
Company
There are already 342 responses
To the article together with this comment 343 another 15 comments the coming of the Messiah 343+15=358= in gematria Messiah.
rival
I didn't mean you or Eitan. And not to K. And not to Shmulik. I admit you were all observant. And I had the pleasure of reading what you wrote. Thanks to you, I became wiser in some details.
I'm sorry if you misunderstood.
Out of the box,
First of all, as I said before, I appreciate those who contribute to the country and for that you and your children have points of merit in my opinion, regarding the discussions here, at least according to what I remember, I always tried not to be blunt, and to refer to the merits of the matter and not to the merits of a person.
If I said something that offended you, I apologize for that (I would be happy if you would give me a link to such a message, I think there were much more blatant messages here than the ones I wrote, from all sides).
Strong
This time I will deviate from my practice
I agree with you word for word.
Wait, so you're saying the butterfly is still in the pupa state
Box
the lie have no legs
He doesn't have wings either.
You may,
If you receive an email from someone who assures you that you have won a million dollars and you just need to send $5000 to a Nigerian bank to cover expenses - would you send it to him? You sound right now just like someone like that. You have bombastic statements, you have no proof and you even say you don't need proof!
Possibly
Rival and firm.
Poor butterfly. Let go.. let him fly a little
It's possible..
I hope there is an effective treatment for the disruptions you have with the keyboard.
When there is an improvement in the condition of the keyboard, will you be able to answer the questions I asked?
Thanks and get well soon
Rival and firm
Indeed it is me in the picture.
In my opinion, if we knew each other then we would be less aggressive. We were more easily...how do you say accept the other.
I also wanted an opponent to know a bit of my general history. After all the blunt language they used against the opinion I presented.
And I don't mean both of you..and you understand
Sorry for the disruption in the last reply especially.
I have a problem with the keyboard that causes serious disruptions...
It's possible..
I asked you questions so that you would open my eyes
Why don't you answer them?
Why don't you need proof?
Ethan, a rival
I was brought up all my knees in Darwin's theory.
already vulva.
I am convinced that Darwin's theory is wrong..
I help the "blind" to see the truth.
I'm not lying and I have no reason to lie...
Think whatever you want
Just keep in mind that your behavior is childish and intolerable...
I don't need proof
It's possible..
I really don't know when you wrote about it.
I'm not trying to innovate, I'm trying to ask you and I'd be happy to answer the questions:
Why do you believe there is a liquid phase before the butterfly emerges from the cocoon?
Why do you believe that pictures of the far side of the moon that were first published in 1959 and most recently in the Haaretz Hayom newspaper, were hidden from the public?
Why when you are confronted with your lie do you repeat and say that you are not ready to discuss the issue?
And finally, in your opinion, have you experienced unfair or offensive treatment from the scientific (medical, more precisely) establishment?
Strong,
He is the one who gave the link here and said that details about him can be found there.
He was not trying to be anonymous.
If he thinks it is out of place I will ask my father to remove the message.
may be…
Everything you wrote is nonsense, why don't you tell based on what you determined that the larva turns into a liquid?
If you haven't seen it with your own eyes, on what basis do you claim this?
Who told you this and why do you believe him, where is your critical thinking?
Box
I will break my habit and stand by your side.
You may feel obligated to tell the truth but you are not obligated to say who you are and this has no effect on your argument.
Rival, your last comment was out of place (what with internet usage frowned upon by neighborhood residents).
Rival, Eitan
I'm not going to chew water…
I have written what I have to say about it.
If you have nothing to update, don't write...
its you in the picture ?
http://www.files.org.il/BRPortalStorage/b/18/00/05-9gWUsO0v5K.jpg
In any case, it's nice to hear that you and your family are among those who contribute to the country, well done, I appreciate it.
rival
You know that according to the Torah it is forbidden to lie.
So maybe I'll tell you some details about me.
I'm not from Mea Shearim.
Out of six sons, one did not reach conscription age, three served in the army. One afsanai one kosher supervisor one claimed the armor connection. And now there is one in the navy and in Gaza who will touch steels or submarines. I urge him to invest in the direction of Katsuna... I want to know more about it, search on Google "Or Comics"
And you are also from the Mea Shearim neighborhood, I imagine.
rival
It's hard to distinguish between me and maybe it's very simple
I am the one with 12 children
maybe…,
Now leave the dark side of the moon and let's focus on the pupa issue, don't you think it's a little silly to claim that the larva turns into a liquid, based on zero evidence for it? Who told you this hallucination? And why do you choose to believe him?
Why doesn't the person who claims this upload a photo of this miracle to the internet?
It's possible..
Where did you show a liquid phase between a caterpillar and a butterfly? Can you direct me or is this another lie?
Pictures of the far (non-dark) side of the moon were first published in 1959 by the Soviets.
Just because you saw a newspaper headline with pictures for the first time today, doesn't necessarily mean it's the first publication. (I have a feeling that beyond the title you didn't bother to read the article or enter the link).
Last question: Do you feel that the scientific establishment has hurt you?
Do you think the scientific establishment made you do something you didn't want to, such as taking unnecessary medication or hospitalization that you felt was unjustified? I think I'm starting to understand where your world view comes from..
Ethan, a rival
I showed, whoever wants to see, see..
I'm not religious, I'm not an atheist
But I believe that the scientific establishment has a lot to hide from the general public...
Example:
Today there was a headline in the country
"Pictures from the dark side of the moon"...
Decades have passed since they walked on the moon...
Why haven't they published pictures from the other side until now?
not out of the box,
Trust me it's not intentional. It's just that you two talk so much nonsense that it's hard not to get confused.
rival
Please, you're confusing me with maybe.. I hope it's not intentional.
Strong
Good Morning.
I agree with you. With everything you wrote.
Many people with deviant sexual orientations live and bring life.
It is possible and certainly very likely, despite Torah. that they were born with these qualities. More than that in everyone, whether they are aware of it or not, there is a strong tendency of one kind or another to this or that sexual situation. A true fact that the Torah refers to is not ignored. More than that, she addresses everyone.
As it is written: "Asher I enjoin today" means commanding the person privately. And everyone has the shortcomings mentioned in the Torah.. such as you shall not covet... you shall not commit adultery... you shall not steal... you shall not answer your neighbor to the point of lying... these qualities are found in us all in varying degrees of strength from one trait to another. and from person to person.
The glorification of these qualities is negative.. See for example Sodom. And the main thing there is not the sexual orientation but a result of .. mine mine and yours. If you have heard of a philosopher named Moshe Kroy.. because his philosophical process is built on this principle.. and he influenced many.. if you check where it ultimately led him. Understand where this philosophy leads. An outgrowth of mine mine and yours yours.. is helping others.. the opposite of the love of humanity. The main problem in Sodom was that they wanted to prevent people from settling in their area. Because of the good and fertile situation that was the place at the time, they feared that they would take away their great wealth. They were against hospitality and against giving charity .. it's worth reading. The idea is that the main thing is my private pleasure, me to myself with no desire to participate with others. Therefore, in the end, an outcome of non-binding sexual contact is also expressed. The main thing is the pleasure and not the purpose of the sexual contact. It is true that they can find a partner for life. But without obligation. Some of them feel within themselves the need for the inner truth, which is the obligation towards the partner, therefore they demand 'equal rights. Marriage and the like, the right to raise a child. etc. They are ready without real mercy towards the other person ..namely the society they are in. They try to realize the lust embedded in them naturally without giving up a different social existence. In return for a financial payment.. Do they check the effect that will be created for that surrogate mother years later and the trauma she may have after a few years because of that birth.
Do they check what will happen to the baby boy that arrives
A cruel world.
The same child who during his life will probably and almost certainly receive insults from society. Where is the widowhood for this child, where is the love of others. Oh yes, they will explain to him how screwed up he is in relation to society. And how much they love him. All just to complete their own enemies. The strangest thing is that they are not even aware of this behavior of themselves.
Unfortunately they are cruel without being aware of their cruel reality.
Even this parade they are doing is sweeping more people with them. And many awaken in them the trait of love that already lies in the human race. Its basis, as we said, is in the individual ego of the person.
That's why I don't donate to people like this. Unless they undergo psychological treatment.. to solve the problem and direct them correctly within the global social structure accepted in the world. I am ready to contribute to that. Let them learn to start a family, man and woman. male and female. A woman who can breastfeed her and her beloved husband's shared baby.
According to very new studies of science. People are genetically born with basic traits and some are enhanced and some are diminished by all kinds of psychological environmental influences. And this is a process of initial exposure. at a very young age. And this will increase the sensitivity to the same effect from the age of even two or three years.
I repeat this is the scientific research. The so-called false memory in the field of psychology.
Describe to you the effect of a child growing up in a home where his mother has a male genitalia. He goes to the pool with mom and dad who are both male. When he sees other male and female mom and dad too. What right do they allow themselves to harm such a child who has just come into the world. On what basis are they doing a social experiment on him? The only reason that seems to me is that self-love hides the risk of the results from them, and they become cruel even unconsciously.
But it's possible.. I want to see, you don't show anything..
Making a claim and accusing everyone of a conspiracy may make you feel special but it is not evidence.
Imagine how special and interesting you will be if you prove for the first time that the caterpillar turns into a liquid. Why are you not interested in proving it?
Or maybe you have already tested it and the result is not to your liking..?
Could it be that you are conspiring against us?
And finally, a question that might save you many responses in the future: What is, in your opinion, evidence that will convince you that the theory of evolution reflects reality?
rival
beginning,
This is just a short section before the butterfly leaves...
You have to capture this moment, and it's not easy...
Second, I am personally convinced that Darwin's theory is wrong.
I don't need to prove her failure, for me.
As I already wrote, I do not intend to convince anyone,
I show, and those who don't want to see, don't see...
I'm just surprised that the scientific establishment didn't see fit to test such a simple fracture
Despite the huge budgets…
Apparently they checked, and the result is not to their liking...
may be…
You are the one making the stupid claim that the cocoon turns into a liquid, don't you think it is your responsibility to prove this nonsense? Take silkworm cocoons at any stage you want, cut with a knife and prove to us that there is only liquid inside!
Why the hell don't you do this?
It's possible..
Your ignoring the arguments and the increasing number of commenters pretty much prove that your lies are done consciously
(To Box's credit, his mistakes seem to stem from a combination of fear and ignorance and he is not knowingly lying).
Even so, I'd love to hear where you get this fantasy about a liquid stage in the butterfly's life cycle.
Do you have a link for that? Image? Article? proof?
Is there any evidence of this other than the fact that you seem to be repeating this under different aliases and on different websites for years?
rival
First, I "and outside the box" are not the same...
Those who believe in Darwin's theory,
He is the one who must prove that there is a "random" process here
As the theory claims.
Otherwise, it's the end of the theory...
Since they have not yet been able to prove that the golem does not turn into a liquid
Although this was required, this is decisive proof of the failure of the theory...
Out of the box,
I tell you again -
Why, instead of talking so much about world conspiracies and governments that try to hide the truth from everyone, don't you get a box with silkworms (they are very easy to get) grow them until they become cocoons (pupa) and at the right moment cut them with a Japanese knife in front of the camera and prove to everyone The world that the caterpillar turned into liquid! Upload the video to YouTube and you might win a Nobel Prize.
What's simpler than that? What exactly are you waiting for??
"There is a claim that the cocoon turns into a liquid"
And have you ever asked yourself what the source of this stupid claim is? Why doesn't the one making the claim prove his words or upload photos of this miracle to the web?
rival
Are you serious ?
I'm talking about photographing the internal process
With the stages that the cocoon turns into a butterfly...
There is a claim that the golem turns into a liquid
Before it develops into a butterfly...
If this is true, the process cannot be random...
Can you bring a movie that refutes this claim?
the evolutionary
Good morning everyone
Box
I don't think the discussions on this site will make you a lover of people.
It also seems that despite all the words and arguments raised here, you have not internalized even a little of the definitions of what science is and what research is.
Nevertheless, I feel the need to correct you on some of your errors, the ignorance behind which is particularly infuriating:
1: There is no connection between a person's sexual orientation being for or against "the existence of the human race"
At the same ridiculous level of strawman arguments you can claim that anyone who drives a car powered by fossil fuels is against the existence of the human race.
Also, there is no scenario in which the existence of people with sexual orientations different from yours or their acceptance in society, endangers the existence of the human race.
Finally, gays and lesbians can also reproduce (and in the future, their options for reproduction will only increase)
2. What "they do" does not go against the basic principle of nature. The need for existence is not related to sexual orientation. Same-sex relationships in other fields pretty much proves it.
3. Once again you show how low your level of understanding is of what science is. You are still captive to the notion that science is a religion and therefore your religion requires you to fight against it.
No one is for or against evolution. This is not a reality show.
There is a model that fits the reality on the ground and the scientific evidence, therefore the theory of evolution is accepted.
Why should it be a hole for those who are "in favor of the process of evolution"? How is this "against the process of evolutionary development"?
Here is a point for you to think about: if sexual orientation is determined by genes (there is no evidence of this) and according to your understanding, gays and lesbians cannot reproduce, that gene should have died out ages ago. Does this mean that you are now an ardent supporter of evolution?
Out of the box,
Here, as you requested, is a link to a video of a golem turning into a butterfly...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AUeM8MbaIk
What do you think ?
Miracles
You are a dirty person.. You ooze evilness...
Apart from cursing, you don't know anything...
You are a disgrace to a site that claims to be scientific...
Bring here a link to a video of a golem turning into a butterfly...
Until then you won't get another response from me...
incidentally,
I marvel at the site manager who allows miracles
To insult the writers here in such a despicable way...
It was for "outside the box" of course.
Why, instead of talking so much about world conspiracies and governments that try to hide the truth from everyone, don't you get a box with silkworms (they are very easy to get) grow them until they become cocoons (pupa) and at the right moment cut them with a Japanese knife in front of the camera and prove to everyone The world that the caterpillar turned into liquid! Upload the video to YouTube and you might win a Nobel Prize.
What's simpler than that? What exactly are you waiting for?
Miracles
For people who are against the continuation of the existence of the human race..that is, who prevent themselves for whatever reason from bringing life into the world.
I don't donate. And not only that, they are also proud of it.
You will agree with me that what they are doing is against the basic principle of nature. the need for existence. Precisely for those who are in favor of the process of evolution, this should be very difficult. It is against the process of evolutionary development.
Miracles
If you read my answer to.. k.
So that's the answer.
Out of the box
Let's make it interesting. I am willing to donate ten thousand dollars to the meeting of your choice if a kangaroo fossil is found in the Middle East by the year 2025.
Are you willing to donate ten thousand dollars to the gay-lesbian association if he is not found by then?
Out of the box
Are you willing to think about the idea that you might be the one who makes up his mind? Do you think the many errors in the Torah could imply that maybe, just maybe, that the story of the Torah is not a true story?
Let's take a simple example. According to the Torah, I would expect to find kangaroo fossils in the Middle East region, right? Doesn't the fact that such a fossil has never been found weaken even a little the training that should be given in the story of the flood?
K.
Sorry I don't respond to what you are trying to bring up. You just drag me to another field in science. And according to the stages of what the theory of the bang explains a process belonging to genetics. Evolution and the like was done after the bang. And yet we have not started the foundation of the formation of the world. So how will it be possible to jump forward..in my opinion you need step by step..first the bang theory. Then the following results from it
for miracles
There are many scientists who believe in the creation of the world 6000 years ago, so it is not outrageous. There are scientists who have less accepted theories about how the universe was formed, so it is not outrageous.
The funniest thing is that everything you all have thrown into the air mainly that I don't understand anything.
And the funniest thing is that part of what I have brought up to now you yourself said and appears on this site itself.
It seems to me because you don't have absolute answers, that's why it upsets you so much.
And another reason is that my daughter makes sense. But that's not your logic. Therefore your claims are that I do not understand anything in science.
In your opinion, Heisenberg is only convenient for you when he is in the field of the theory you invented.
A mathematician suddenly tells me... after explaining to me that he deals with theoretical mathematics. that it is not possible to project mathematical assumptions on reality. Although he does this about the theory. and builds a fictional reality. But on simple logic that I throw from the side of understanding and simple reasoning, this is unacceptable and incorrect. The reason is that there is an absolute axiom that he chose with some people. Only from the angle that suits him is he allowed to look and draw conclusions. But from another angle, God bless you. It's childish, it's a lie, and it's cowardice. I don't understand who is more of a coward, the one who explains how he sees the scientific theories of science regarding the bang (relying on science) or the one who hurls insults and slogans like you don't understand anything and the like..
Company, you are just showing how rusty your box is. Take some oil. I hope you will be able to oil the hinge of the door of your box and you will be able to think in a new and original way outside the box.
If you are really true to yourselves, you would admit that most of the things I wrote are said by science itself. Only my point of view is different from yours. My conclusions are different. I have to run in the herd. To think like a "walking dead man" firmly in the mathematical way and to trust in the miracles of modern science as you and only you understand ..companion I have not been there for a long time. The restrictions you have placed on yourself have determined your mind. You are unable to see beyond your theory of a nation. And as Wiki says...that in order to explain the lack of dominance of the universe's universal gravity in accelerated expansion. The researchers assume that there is dark energy.. It is determined to hold the theory still standing.
It's already becoming a lack of dominance. I don't understand. Explain to me when there actually was a revolution in the universe according to the big bang. And not just acceleration... I understood if there was only acceleration and everything spreads. And in particular when it started at a speed higher than the speed of light somewhere in another dark period. So when and how were the stars formed. Therefore we must say... in order to revive the most accepted theory. There is some dark force that shaped everything. Something that forced the material to appear as it is today. What a force that the Jedi have known for a long time. And all of this makes sense. The main thing is to hold the theory otherwise what shall we say. .. ha.. where will we be...ha...we look stupid.. liars.. don't know what they are talking about.. ok now after we found that there is a dark force let's prove that it exists. Then you find some kind of proof that she believes corresponds to the dark power. that until 1988 it was not at all in our awareness that there was such a thing in our lighting explosion. Well we changed the theory by 68℅ of energy.. Is there only one finding. Small... all in all an acceleration instead of a deceleration. can tilt the whole theory. We thought the expansion of the universe would stop or contract. But today it may also be that it will not stop spreading.. Wait, we actually know nothing about where it leads.. Well, at least everyone admits it. We don't know anything about the future of the bang. But for the first three seconds we know how it happened. oh seriously...oh...
may be…
You stupid and miserable piece of liar 🙂
Did you search on YouTube???? Did you search in universities?
I have seen the hatching of a butterfly several times, and as far as I know it is a common sight in kindergartens. For years, my wife used to bring to the kindergartens sprouts of the cabbage labnein, the silkworm, and the swallow's tail.
You are just garbage of a human being... how dare you claim something against someone else??
I suggest you stare a bit in the mirror at the scoundrel reflected in front of you and think.
The lies of institutionalized science irritate me
And especially hiding the truth...
Despite many billions of dollars being poured into it from public funds.
for example,
How is it possible that despite the sophisticated means of photography these days
There is not a single photograph of the wonderful moments
of turning the cocoon into a butterfly?
K.
You continue to bark and continue to slander as usual...
outside the box
Shut up - you don't understand physics. You are spouting some other nonsense every time. Aren't you tired of wading through the mud looking for someone with a PhD in physics?
Even in the Torah it turns out that you do not understand much...
I'll tell you again - if you believe that the world is less than 6000 years old, you have nothing to do on the science site!
Out of the box
Indeed, this is what the Creator wanted and did. There is a rebuke written in the book on the first day what was created. "The light was created on the first day in perfection in the entire universe" and it is so in science, the farther you look, the closer you are to the beginning of time from creation as written.
The Torah has been true since the beginning, just as it was luck that time was created first, the first day was created thus and so. And the complexity of the world increases and time moves away or moves forward. And so on Shabbat the work of Berea was closed. And so the times pass and do not return and the complexity increases and man differs from the beast. And the person discovers that the time has passed and the time has come to pee and sleep. 🙂
Albentezo
Look at what Wiki writes about dark energy
Observations of type Ia supernovae in 1998 led researchers to the conclusion that the universe is accelerating its rate of expansion. This is a surprising conclusion, because according to the law of universal gravitation it is expected that the speed of expansion of the universe will slow down because of the gravitational force acting between all the masses in it. In order to explain the lack of dominance of universal gravity in a universe whose expansion is accelerating, the researchers assume the existence of dark energy.
That's it Vicky.. not me. Send to the wiki that they are not lying idiots and the like please
Something's not right so let's cover it up in a dark and beautiful way. 68%
The creator has some really amazing works, but sometimes it gets a little bit off for him, like this in a small way:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treacher_Collins_syndrome
Albentezo
Response to 5
Here we will enter the manner of creation. Indeed, this is already the most interesting part, the clash between the explanation of the scientific theory and the Torah data. The theory about the time it takes for light to reach a huge distance, which says that the photograph we are receiving now belongs to light that took such and such years, therefore we are seeing something that was So and so years ago. That's understandable
And this is where the Torah comes in and reveals to us that light was created on the first day in perfection in the entire universe, that is, that the stars were placed in the universe by the Creator. They were placed with the light reaching the earth. That is, immediately they were seen with their light. It is true that the laws of nature do not work out so well here. And it's true, it's wonderful. Indeed, this is what our Creator is able to do
Albantazo response to 4
Note that we are building today with today's atom structure. and with materials that exist today. A particle accelerator surrounded by the entire universe. And it is assumed that there is no influence of the environment on that accelerator around and on the assumption that the accelerator itself does not affect the result. After all, anyone who understands even a little knows that there is an effect on the particles even in the way they are tested. And all this is happening with the data we have today in the size of a failure, something that does not even reach the beginning of zero size and not the same compression. We break down matter in order to find the original matter. But we lack other elements that do not exist. Come on, get serious. Even if we manage to bring the experiment to success under the exact same conditions. Still the scale would be one in a trillion. And we trust that. Allow me to scratch my back a little in the meantime
Out of the box,
I just read your previous response to Albenzo (following what he replied to you). The truth is that it's really quite embarrassing... I can understand why Albenzo is not interested in answering you anymore. I want to believe that you are actually greedy and just enjoy writing in this way to drive people crazy. I really hope so.
Albentezo
By the way, what I wrote earlier was a response to comment #3
The model is built on a result... that is, a given situation. and exists and scientists have built a theory. which provides them and in order to solve the difficulties in the theory they invented a new thing in recent years... and also gave it an explosive name to make it sound believable. dark energy. Without it, the age of the world does not work. Any magician from the age of three can pull such a rabbit out of his sleeve.
Albentezo
Response to 2
So I understand that conclusions and implications are not reached through mathematics... if I understood correctly
Albentezo
Answer to 1
theoretical models. Like they did in the lab about the comet and got a few details wrong..
A certain one in the lab. Did you crammed the entire universe into a lab.. I don't remember being crammed in there..
All in all theoretical models based on data accumulated today. This is the appearance of a lady in a change of dress
box,
Every word you write is complete nonsense. In my life I have never met a person with less knowledge than you. I decided not to treat you anymore, simply because you are not worth treating. You are a very, very stupid man, who for some reason decided he knew everything without learning anything. But just so you can't say I'm evasive, I'm attaching several points where you're completely wrong:
1. Everything you wrote at the beginning is true for empiricist science only, one that disappeared from the world hundreds of years ago. Today one does not deduce a theory from a measurement and then project it onto other measurements. Today the measurements are performed in synergy with theoretical models that produce *predictions*. This method, whose father is Newton, makes it possible to understand what is behind measurements and therefore produce new predictions that can be verified in the laboratory. In doing so, we produce an understanding of nature and not just a list of things we measured as you describe ("Oh, I measured it on Earth, I'll extrapolate and guess it's also true on Mars"... sorry, that's not how it works).
2. Everything you wrote about "the example from the accounting world" is meaningless language and demagoguery (admittedly of a 3-year-old child, but still). All mathematics is tautological, therefore there is no such thing as cause or effect. Therefore your analogy is simply a distortion that has nothing to do with the scientific method, and it has no point.
3. What is "difficulties in the age of the world theory"? difficulties why? Hard bread? Difficult in training? You're just throwing out meaningless passwords. You avoid making a concrete statement (that is, pointing out something wrong that the scientists are doing) and it is also very clear why. After all, even in the first comments of this thread, which will reach 300 comments in a moment, you proved that you have no idea what the Big Bang model is. So it is quite clear why you talk about "difficulties in the age of the world" and are unable to make a single coherent sentence regarding the scientific research or any kind of problem that exists in it.
4. Science is not based on "observations and their reactions, the processes in the behavior of the atoms, the particles in the current state, as they exist today in nature." This is what a person who knows *nothing* about science might think (by the way, I've asked you several times already and you're evasive. So maybe you'll answer, coward? The question is simple: don't you think you should learn something about science before you talk about it?) . With the help of particle accelerators we recreate the conditions of the early universe. We study behaviors in energy scales A-D-Y-R-V-T. We know how to cool materials and study them close to absolute 0. Everything you write is just the stupidity of a person who does not understand a word of the subject he is talking about.
5. The Big Bang theory is based on data gathered from cosmological observations. It doesn't matter when you collected the information, it matters when it was created. If I take a picture today and you collect it in 100 years, then is the picture from 2015 or 2115? I hope you agree it's still from 2015. So if you bothered to study physics in high school, you would know that today we know how to collect light that "photographed" the universe billions of years ago. We are collecting the information today, but the light we are gathering is not only of the current state of the universe.
6. Because there was some inaccuracy in some measurement of some asteroid (which you elegantly avoid saying what it is, I bet you have no idea) so the big bang is wrong? I realised. So what you're saying is that if anyone ever made a mistake in science, then everything science says is wrong? Ok, to the best of my recollection you openly admitted that the estimate of Pai you brought from the Torah is not 100% accurate, but has a small error. So according to this, everything written in the Torah is wrong, right?
I know you don't know the meaning of the word sarcasm, but that's what's going on here. I'll simplify for you: the argument "there is an error in some measurement of some particular size related to which asteroid, so the big bang is wrong" is really the dumbest argument I've ever heard in my life. Mazel Tov.
7. My dear, just because *you* don't know anything about dark energy doesn't mean everyone else is as stupid as you. Go to a scientific publication site like arXiv and search. Please don't speak for me and the other physicists.
8. Your sections XNUMX, XNUMX and XNUMX are simply lies. Lies with a determined forehead. I have nothing to explain about them, because they are simply lies. There is *no* assumption that the early universe had the same conditions as today, there is *no* consensus on the existence of many elements in the early universe (in fact, nucleosynthesis, the field that studies in physics the formation of the chemical elements in the early universe, is a fairly precise field and the consensus in it is exactly, but exactly , the opposite of what you wrote). Finally, what unknown processes of connecting atoms are you missing?
You're not only stupid, you're also a really, really liar. And that's why I won't respond to you anymore.
Out of the box,
You managed to confuse me…
You wrote: "There is no Bible that comes out of its hands."
Which means, if I understand correctly, that it is not correct to interpret things as they are... and I have seen, for example, those who explain: "The tendency to study the Bible in the way of "the Bible's simplicity" distorts its intent."
If indeed this is so, which interpretation is the correct one in the event that the interpretations do not coincide? I assume that we are not ready to accept that the correct description of creation is that the world was created in seven days (days as defined by us at this time) but also that the world was created in a different period of time, right? What determines?
(Note - I am aware that these questions are really not related to science, so if anyone has any misunderstandings on the subject, correct them immediately).
Thanks for the honest answer.
That is, if it is written that someone who does something should be stoned, then in your opinion is that what should be done?
Out of the box,
How do you know that you and this whole universe were not created by the devil five seconds before you read this comment, when the whole world already looks "old" and you have memories and beliefs that have been implanted in you so that you think you have already lived for years and that your belief is based on a book that seems to have been written a long time ago?
And if you can't know for sure, why don't you seriously consider this possibility?
I'm also waiting for your answer to the other questions I asked you that you haven't answered yet...
K.
The Torah is divided as a whole to simplify a sermon hint and a secret. Four lovers is deeper than that. But regarding what is written in the Bible, that is, in the Pentateuch. There is no such thing as a Bible.
If that's what you mean, then yes
Albentezo
According to my understanding, you tried to explain to me the way in which science in different situations refers to the percentages of accuracy. When is it significant and when is it not?
With your permission, I will try to explain my understanding of the subject. I will also try to bring simple examples from the world of accounting.
Science talks about "theories" that are based on certain known facts, and drawing conclusions based on them in the field of the unknown. Here science has two general methods of drawing conclusions.
A. the interpolation method; in which they try to speculate, on the basis of the reactions at two certain extremes, what the reaction will be at some point between them
B. The extrapolation method; in which hypotheses are made regarding what is beyond a known range, based on certain variables within the known range. For example: suppose we know the variables of a certain element within the temperature range 0°-100° and on this basis we estimate what the reaction could be at 101° 200°. or 2000°.
It is clear that among the methods, the second method (extrapolation) is the least certain. Furthermore, the uncertainty increases the greater the distance from the known range and the smaller this range. That is, if the known range is 0°-100°, our conclusion about 101° is more likely than about 1001°
We will immediately point out that all the speculations regarding the origin and age of the world are in the field of the second, weaker method, the extrapolation method, the weakness is even more pronounced, when we remember that a rule deduced from a known result regarding its unknown cause, is more speculative than the conclusion from the cause to the effect. It is very easy to notice that a conclusion based on a result is more speculative than a conclusion from the cause and the cause to the result. calculator example;
2÷4=2 Here the factor is represented by the divisor and divisor, and the result by the quotient. In this case, when the cause is known, there is only one result - the portion (the number 2)
However, if we only know the final result, i.e. the number 2, and we ask ourselves in what way we can reach the number 2, there are many answers, in different ways we can reach the same result: a) 1+1=2. b) 4-2=2 c) 2÷4=2. If it is allowed to use additional digits as well, then the number of ways that give the same result is unlimited..
To this is added another difficulty that governs all the methods of simulating from the particular to the general (induction). A conclusion based on any known data, when they are of an impulative nature, that is, when they are projected onto unknown areas. It has any value only on the assumption that "everything else remains constant". That is, assuming the identity of the governing conditions, their actions and reactions, one to the other. But if we cannot be sure that the changes will have at least a close relation to the known variables in terms of degree; If we cannot be sure that the changes will be similar in terms of type; if in addition to that, we cannot be sure that other factors were not involved - after all, the conclusions accumulated in this way are worthless!
A simple example in a chemical example between cracking and fusion. When a catalyst is introduced into the process and even in a tiny amount (0.2℅) it could change the entire rate and form of a chemical process. Or can even start a completely new process (see an example from the article on which we started the comments)
Still, this is not all the difficulties in the age of the world theory.
Let's remember that the entire structure of science in general is based on observations and reactions of the processes in the behavior of the particle atoms in the current state. As they exist today in nature. Scientists deal with clusters of billions of atoms as they are bound together and as they relate to other existing clusters. Also with particle accelerators. There is still very little known about the particles in their initial state. About the action of one single atom on another single atom in a state of separation. One thing is certain for scientists today - as far as recognition is possible - that the reactions of these individual atoms with each other is completely different from the reactions of one cluster of atoms with another
In conclusion:
A. The theory of the bang is based on data observed over a relatively short period of time. Approximately 200 years
B. On the basis of a relatively small range of known data (knowledge not perfect at all) (proof that the discovery of Pluto's size is different from what they thought, it is a celestial object that is closest in relation to the entire universe. On the comet that landed on it, they discovered that there were several errors in the calculations. Inaccuracies on two c "Heavens are particularly close.. What about the entire universe and in particular the distant one that is visible to us not to mention the one that is not visible. And not to mention a new type of energy. Which is completely unknown to us that makes up over 70℅ of the universe. A huge figure that we have no information about. Except for bone existence)
C. In this theory, even though it is known that in the initial period of the "birth" of the world, the conditions were different for the universe starting from an infinite mass compressed to zero. And ended in a dark period that is not a gift for testing. rule. These revolutionary factors are completely ignored. As if they function according to the assumptions we have today.
D. There is a consensus in science that there must have been many foundations in the initial stage. which no longer exist. or there is little of them left in the universe. Some of these elements whose revolutionary and destructive cataclystic power even in minute quantities is well known
E. The creation of the world, according to these theories, began with the process of connecting individual atoms or parts of an atom. Their accumulation and crystallization, in processes, and with changes that are not known at all
So far for today
It seems to me that "maybe" has exhausted himself, what do you say? Can we agree to let him continue to bark at himself?
Out of the box,
It is implied from your response that you believe that what is written in the Torah should be accepted literally, for example:
"As soon as you interpret the words "one day" as opposed to a simple one, the whole idea of Shabbat is a seventh day. What appears in that connection, loses its original meaning. The whole point of keeping the Sabbath is based on the clear and unequivocal statement in the Torah: "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day the Sabbath and soul" are days rather than periods.
Am I right? Or are there cases in which it would not be right to accept things as they are?
elbentzo
I'm not lying, you're lying and you were caught in a lie too...
I don't bother to read what you write.
I guess you are not a physicist, as you pretended to be…
K.
As I wrote,
I don't read what you write.
Because you don't deserve you…
The dogs bark and the caravan moves on…
Out of the box
It is not written in the Torah that the earth is spherical, and it is also written that it is flat. You are just afraid of the truth.
What are you confusing the mind with probabilities? So you have proven beyond any doubt that you don't even know what it is?
Are the laws of science probabilities? You really are a complete moron, or maybe as possible you are lying to sell your primitive beliefs.
In relativity, for example, there are no probabilities.
If you think the world is less than 6000 years old then you are just an idiot.
You must understand that you do not know what science is. You live in a world of lies, which is essentially no different from the world of lies of the possible.
I have friends who believe, but they understand that their faith must be adjusted to what science has discovered. There are trees that are 8000 years old, and there are also trees that are close to 12,000 years old. Only a complete idiot could deny these facts. There is no problem being a believer and accepting science - but you are not there.
may be…
As usual you express a strong opinion (and obviously false) about things that according to your own testimony you have not even read, could you...?
By the way, if you find the discussions here stupid, then I promise you that they will improve miraculously if you stop commenting, but somehow I have a strange feeling in my gut that you have no such intention, but who knows, maybe you will still surprise and start behaving like a decent person, one who wants to learn What is the position of scientists on science issues, and one that raises (legitimate) questions without providing completely wrong "answers" in the same breath, without contradicting and without "teaching" things that the connection between them and science is strictly coincidental. Are you able to try to drive fairly? Try to think, for example, how it would be correct for secular people to behave when they comment on a religious website that deals with religious issues, do you think that a response that includes contempt for religion, telling lies, avoiding answering questions, expressing an unreasoned and unfounded opinion that reflects complete ignorance of the scriptures and presenting it as if it were the accepted and decisive opinion , is this a good way to behave, or is it a devious behavior that only indicates the low level of the one who takes it?
Listen, dumbass. I will speak very slowly, maybe you will understand:
I'm not claiming you really said those things. It was a ruse. I laid a trap for you, and you fell into it.
When you made up a quote of mine, and I resented it - you ran away from responsibility, you blamed the system, you blamed me. When I called you a liar, then you said that my behavior was vile, that I was childish, that I was committing character assassination on you because of something unimportant.
So I laid a trap for you - I did to you exactly, but exactly, what you did to me. I made up a quote of yours that you never said. And wonder of wonders, when you're on the side that's making up lies about him (and not on the side of the lie) suddenly you get alarmed, suddenly you call me a poor liar, suddenly it's not okay to make up quotes.
How did you change the tune? When I lie, it's horrible and I should be called a wretched liar and denounced. When you lie, then it's fine, not bad, and what everyone is excited about, and it's not your fault at all, and Albenzo is childish and vile because he calls you a liar….
You are a liar and a hypocrite. And now that you've fallen for the trap, you've provided us all with the clearest proof of that.
did you understand Or explain again?
elbentzo
You are a liar and a vile person...
Cite with date…
It is possible,
Aha. Finally the token falls.
When I write that you claimed something, even though you never claimed it, I am a vile liar. But when you claim that I said things that I never said and I'm defending myself - then I'm childish, I'm vile, I'm attacking you for not being unjust, and the rest of the nonsense you tried to sell us when I drew your attention to the fact that you're making up quotes of mine that never existed...
elbentzo
You are also a vile liar…
She wrote:
Miracles,
I don't understand why you are arguing. After all, a few comments ago he "maybe" already wrote that he is on the site just to troll and annoy and that he himself does not believe in the things he says but just enjoys watching us squirm. He admitted it himself, so why continue?
August 5th, 2015
box,
I read your comment (I thought it was pretty clear from my reply). I wrote another comment but it is waiting for approval. Its essence -
Oh my god, you have no idea what you're talking about. Don't use terms you have no idea what they mean, and don't try to explain to me what modern science means when it's clear that the average sixth grader has more scientific knowledge than you do.
I read your comment. You so don't know what you're talking about it hurts. You have no end of understanding of the concepts you use. For example, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle is not a series of magic words that means that we don't know anything for sure and in fact maybe the Torah is right. The principle speaks of parallel lexicons of Hermitian operators, and in its statistical version speaks of standard deviations of measurement distributions.
Wow, I'm shocked at how much nonsense you talk. You're like a little kid, it's amazing. And that you don't have an iota of shame, that you don't feel like a complete fool when you write things that you know (!!!) that you have no idea about, use terms that you know (!!!) that you don't understand what they are saying - this is the clearest and simplest indictment against your religious institution.
A person can believe and can not, but only a person who has really undergone extreme brainwashing will not bat an eyelid while writing scrolls about modern science and the uncertainty principle, the big bang and star formation, irrational numbers and measurement errors with so, so, so little knowledge and understanding like you . You are simply a shame to the intelligent religious people, whatever they are (and I know for sure that a person can be a believer, even pious, but not let the religious institution turn him into a stupid robot like you. I know because I know many of them, including in my immediate family).
Albentezo
Please read what I wrote for miracles. There are things there that you also said. And of course things you won't like. I will ask for your forgiveness in advance
box,
The basic conflict between science and faith is that science produces curious people who feel they must explore the world in order to understand it, and faith produces people who think that if they cover their ears and close their eyes, and just do what authority tells them (the rabbi, the priest, the Torah, the Koran, etc. Ron Hubbard, etc.) then they will have all the answers.
And there is no better demonstration of this than your response, which begins by telling us what modern science says, that everything is relative, and the whole steaming pile of nonsense that makes it clear that you have no idea what you are talking about - but you have no shadow of a doubt that you can teach us (when some of us active scientists in the fields of natural sciences, engineers and more) what science says.
Miracles
I think you are looking for an answer to the question of how I relate to science.. or another question you asked about the origin of the Torah for the earth being a sphere.. I answered the second about the eyes. You may not like the sources cited, but it is what it is. And to me that's enough.
Regarding my reference in science. And I clarified myself several times...I don't remember if it was towards you, towards Eitan or towards four of you. that you are included among them.
I may not have explained myself properly because I was asked the same question again. So I will try to explain again.
First I will clarify my reference to the Torah. A reference based on entire generations that acted according to this principle.
There really is no conflict between faith and science. And precisely from the point of view of modern science. After all, there can be no contradiction between science and faith. According to modern science, not all laws of nature are fixed. it's all relative. And what were once called laws by scientists. are nothing but probabilities. Modern science does not pretend to establish certainties in the material world. The fact that a certain thing behaves in a certain way today is not absolute proof, that the same thing behaved in the same way thousands of years ago, or will behave in the same way in many years to come. But the condition that all the other factors: including the external physical conditions of the atmosphere, outer space, temperature, pressure, etc., etc., are equal, and this is apart from human nature which also changes. Even if all conditions are equal. Modern science will say then. that the previous behavior of a certain thing still does not guarantee that the thing will indeed behave in the same way in the future, but only that there is a "chance" (probability) of this.
It is therefore clear that modern science cannot pretend to judge with any degree of certainty, the truths that our faith establishes. The most that science can say is only that these truths are possible. It seems, therefore, that there is clearly no place at all to talk about any kind of conflict between science and faith.
In addition, there are certain orthodox scientists, ashamed or embarrassed, when they must openly declare their adherence to basic truths of the Torah. such as the creation of Adam and Eve or the possibility of Arwens in our time, as it is defined in the Torah, i.e. an event that is contrary to (the so-called) "laws of nature",
And if some of them are asked. Directly. How do they manage and throw away a lack of self-conviction through basic Torah, and everything that a Jew believes, believes in and practices according to, their solution is that they divide their day in such a way that Torah and prayer and all that belongs to them, form one category: and science belongs to a separate category.
It is clear that this does not correspond to the daily declaration of every Jew "because God is the God of God, there is no other besides Him" It is clear that this is about all the details in the life of the Jew. And not just for some of them.
This detail creates a split personality in the person.
And about miracles. The Torah clearly states its view, "There is no trust in a miracle." But at the same time it requires the Jew to be imbued with complete faith that God works in the way of nature and also in a way that is above nature. And this is the meaning of the verse "so that the Lord may bless you in all the works of your hands" meaning that it is necessary to do and not rely on the miracle, but the blessing in the deeds is ultimately from the Lord
A little over a century ago, the scientists still spoke in terms of absolute truths.. but today the governor in the dome is a principle of the highest probability (as some of you have already said) and this is even in the fields of practical science as it is applied to everyday matters. And especially in matters such as the creation of the world, The origin of life on earth and more. When the theories on these subjects are based on mere extrapolation and hypotheses, not least when it comes to pure science, where everything is based on conditional assumptions (ie "if we assume such and such, then the result will be such and such") scientists today do not discuss certainties or absolute truths.
Probably here it is necessary to remind the scientists. Opposite are some "outdated" truths of the Torah. There are scientific "hypotheses".
For example, Heisenberg's principle of "non-determinism"?! In principle, this puts an end to the scientific assertion that was widespread, that the relationship between cause and effect is mechanical and direct. Today it is not scientific at all, to see a certain event as a necessary result of another event, these see it as the most likely result. Most scientists accepted this principle as an essential and universal principle. The 18th century approach to science that was dogmatic, mechanistic, and predetermined. She passed away. Today's scientist does not expect to find absolute truth in science.
Hence the explanation that whatever the development of science may be, it will still deal with probability and not with absolute truths.
There is no need to add that my intention is not to discount the importance of science, theoretical or applied. And this is due to a completely different reason. In fact, the Torah itself grants science in certain fields. More valid even than science claims for itself. In many cases the halacha accepts scientific findings as not possible or plausible. Because they are certain.
Hence according to what I clarified. There is no reason for science. And there is no legitimate justification (even from his point of view) to challenge the Torah from Sinai. Therefore, in my understanding, there is no need to try to reinterpret passages of the Torah, in order to fit scientific theories, and even more so the passages concerning the words and structure of the Torah. for example. Regarding the attempt to interpret the first parasha in the Torah, which talks about the creation of the world, in such a way that it sounds as if we are talking about ages and not actual days. A kind of cheap interpretation except that it is not needed, those that it violates the very commandment of Shabbat which is weighed against the entire Torah.! As soon as you interpret the words "one day" as opposed to the simple, the whole idea of Shabbat is a seventh day. What appears in that connection, loses its original meaning. The whole point of keeping the Sabbath is based on the clear and unambiguous statement in the Torah: "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day the Sabbath and soul" days rather than periods.
Today there is no need to try to adapt the Torah to science with an inferiority complex. Science has simply progressed. And precisely this progress in the concepts of science gives stronger legitimacy to what is written in the Torah)
That is, when science accepted Heisenberg's uncertainty principle,
I apologize for the length of my words but to those who asked where I stood on science. and the faith. Hope I managed to make myself clear
for example As if to try to
Miracles,
I don't understand why you are arguing. After all, a few comments ago he "maybe" already wrote that he is on the site just to troll and annoy and that he himself does not believe in the things he says but just enjoys watching us squirm. He admitted it himself, so why continue?
Possibly
you are not welcome here When will you understand that? This is the "Hidan" site, not the "Liar" site, and your lies have no limits.
Strong
Further to the response regarding the video:
A- For most of the time the cocoon exists, there is no change in it, it is a cocoon...
In the video contains the exact same images, during the golem's freeze,
When the photo is taken at alternating angles. There is no point in it...
C- What is essential to show, the critical situation includes the exit of the butterfly from the cocoon...
ב
K.
You are an expert at spewing a lot of stinking garbage here
I don't bother to read your rubbish here,
But the length raises suspicion...
Those who stink make sure to wrap the stench in a lot of words...
I guess I'm challenging a lot of your basic life conventions…
It's probably time...
may be…
You are not only a vile liar and a disgusting commenter, you are also a deadly combination of ignorance, narrow-mindedness and arrogance that has no justification or basis. When you don't know/understand something (the theory of evolution, for example), it doesn't mean that it's impossible or not true, but only that you still haven't bothered to check what *science* has to say on the subject and what is the factual basis that unequivocally supports this theory for which there is consensus sweeping about its correctness among the scientists - who, we, are the professionals who understand these issues better than the vast majority of human beings that exist in this world. Except that you come with a (wrong) notion that you acquired from some source of slander, perhaps from Christian creationists and perhaps from the wretched Jews who are so stupid that they steal the arguments of the Christian creationists, and you come here, a place where you could get explanations and references regarding the scientific position on the subject (which is the position the only one that is at all relevant in any scientific subject), and makes infantile statements about science that you have no clue about. This is one of the most despicable and disgusting ways to have a scientific "discussion". I feel sorry for you that your moral level is so low, because ignorance can be corrected but character is much harder to change. I'm glad that we only have to put up with you in every few comments and that we don't have to put up with a character like yours in our day-to-day life, because I have no doubt that vileness like you present here, including your disgusting self-righteousness, is reflected in everything you do. The truth is that I feel a little sorry for you, but you have responsibility for the way you behave, no matter where you grew up, and I think it's time to take responsibility for what you do.
Friends
I'm quite tired of the stupid discussions here...
Strong
are you kidding
can't see anything…
And besides, it seems to me that only part of the time is filmed
And not the critical part...
How beautiful, both science and entertainment at the same price (ie free).
Out of the box, some flashes, I can't keep up! 🙂
But the nonsense you wrote about Fay really reached a new high, in case anyone missed the barb that the lift produced:
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth"
28 letters 7 words...28 divided by 7 =π
And the icing on the cake is that this "argument" is intended to convince that the verse alludes to the earth's fertility. What a worn out God that does not know the value (and more importantly the meaning) of this wonderful number. For the avoidance of doubt, of course I do not believe that God is ignorant and stupid, there is no reason at all to think that God exists, I think I meant to write - what worn out religious commentators, who find the most lame and stupid excuses to justify these nonsense stories, and how sad it is that so many religious They are captives from their infancy in this terrible thought structure, which distorts all knowledge, and distorts all logic. In moments like these, I feel awe towards the amazing captives who managed to break out of the confines of this prison of vanity, and go free despite all the difficulties they face.
Outside the box, correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that you're pretty much relying on the fact that God exists, can you say here why you believe God exists? I think you've already been asked about it before but you didn't really answer. I'm interested to see if you have any good reason.
Maybe ..
I'm sure you're aware that there are arthropods that only undergo partial metamorphosis, right?
But again, now change the subject !!
Out of the box
What happened that you kept quiet? You didn't find a source for what you said, so you keep quiet, instead of admitting a mistake?
Yossi Simon
It doesn't belong to what I'm saying 🙂
I demonstrated that through the gap it is possible to create new information.
Therefore, this argument, like all the other arguments of the victorious quack, is false.
may be…
you said something I showed you that you were wrong. You agreed with me that you were wrong. And you change the subject.
very mature
It's possible..
please: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SoMs5czRo14
A search of a few seconds on the net. I'm guessing you haven't done one.
Still waiting for you to show me something other than a desperate reading that we are all wrong.
maybe…,
I thought you were asking about the evolutionary development that created these transitions, regarding the stages of transition from caterpillar to pupa and butterfly there are tons of pictures and videos on Google and YouTube you just have to search. I don't remember if you claimed this in the past or someone else, but the stupid claim that the golem at some stage turns into a liquid that turns into a butterfly came up here, a short investigation on the subject showed that this is nonsense and the golem at no point turns into a liquid (if that's what you implied).
rival
Since you bring here links to the incarnations of the butterfly,
You should bother to find documentation of how the transition from stage to stage is done in reality
By video or at least pictures...
(I'm not talking about the "evolutionary" development)
It seems to me that this matter is once again an opener to understanding the issue...
rival
I also recommend the research of Prof. Amir Aili, who is still researching the biology behind the locust phenomenon.
http://www.tau.ac.il/~ayali/CV.html
It's possible..
I definitely believe you are not an ophthalmologist.
Still, I really want to see. You just show nothing.
Shouting "you're all wrong and I'm not going to say why" is not proof. It's not even an argument.
That's all you do here. Shouting and mocking the respondents.
Rival's link shows you've been doing this for years.
It seems the only thing you learned from 2011 is that there is no A in the word biologist.
Do you have something important to say?
Second article (by Zvi Yanai and Meir Paul Fenner) "Life and Incarnations in Nature":
http://thinkil.co.il/texts/m042p003-009
Strong
I'm just showing those who want to see...
Those who don't want to see, don't see.
I'm still not a poor doctor...
I found two interesting articles in Hebrew about the evolution of the butterfly and its various incarnations from caterpillar to adult.
Here is the first link, "Why metamorphosis?"
http://www.insectour.com/Web/?PageType=0&ItemID=283698
Tikun - which created the various incarnations of the butterfly.
I found an interesting thread in Orange on the topic of evolution that created the various incarnations of the butterfly:
http://www.tapuz.co.il/forums2008/viewmsg.aspx?forumid=938&messageid=151633230
It's possible..
I thought that was the point of the discussion. If you're not trying to convince me why are you responding?
The model I proposed is not a belief but a hypothesis backed by fossil evidence.
Do you have a competing model? Can you share with us?
Or maybe all you know is to shout "You're all wrong and I'm not going to say why"
Albentezo
First, thank you for the more moderate manner. The atmosphere is more pleasant when you wrote. And as I wrote before, it is easier for me to read. What you write without background noise.
Because I am also a family man and need to support myself. I will read more carefully what you wrote. I will ask questions. Hopefully they will be more relevant and accurate. Also, it is very possible that I will write things that are not in the spirit of your thought, I will ask for patience and long-suffering. It is possible that a good Yom Tov came out sweet
Yes it is possible... the things you believe in are not at all absurd, an almighty god that was created by itself and is millions of times more complex than anything you claim cannot be created by itself.
how do you say ? Tol Cora is between your eyes.
rival
The paper tolerates anything…
Even the biggest absurdity…
Strong
Keep believing in what you believe...
I'm not going to convince you that you're wrong…
I found here an interesting explanation for the evolutionary process that created the transition stages from a caterpillar hatching from an egg to a butterfly, quite similar to Eitan's explanation:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/insect-metamorphosis-evolution
Albanzo, I salute your patience, but it seems pointless to me. Your palugata bari did not come here to listen and wait but to defy and they are doing it in a way that seriously hurts even their own agenda.
Strong,
It seems to me that what he was trying to say is that the whole process of turning a caterpillar into a butterfly is too complex, and it is not clear to him how something can develop naturally - an egg from which a caterpillar hatches, which turns into a pupa, which turns into a butterfly... I think I have already heard this claim before from people of faith.
Good Morning
It's possible..
It is not clear to me why in your opinion continuous and continuous development is not possible.
I also don't understand the sentence: "Even more absurd, that such incarnations could develop at the same time
In thousands of different animals for sure"
It seems to me that you think that the life stages of the butterfly evolved simultaneously or maybe you think that the transformation of a caterpillar into a pupa is the evolution of a single individual?
I really don't understand what you are trying to convey and would appreciate a slightly more detailed question.
Are you trying to ask if there is a model for the appearance of insects that go through life courses that include a pupal stage?
In which we will try to describe such a model at the most basic level:
For the sake of simplifying the model, we will ignore the egg stage. Egg-laying creatures existed before there were butterflies (and before the emergence from the water occurred), also, ignoring the flying butterfly stage, the ability to fly in insects also existed before there were butterflies. Since evolution does not create systems out of nothing but makes new use of existing systems, the model does not need to explain the matter of wings.
So we start with a flying insect that lays eggs. From the eggs hatches a creature with the final appearance of a flying insect that during its life will only grow without a substantial morphological change. (This stage is called the nymph stage and exists in certain insects even today).
A mutation in this insect that will cause premature hatching from the egg, can harm the insect's chances of survival. It can also give him an advantage over insects in other eggs. (be the first to hatch)
Such an advantage will soon translate into the trait taking over the population. Competition within the population can lead to a state of hatching from the egg before full maturation (pre-nymph state)
Now, in an entire population of insects that hatch from the egg in the pre-nymph stage) into the larva and continue development outside the egg, the larva that is able to move at this stage will have an advantage in order to stay away from the competition.
In an entire population where there is a postponement of growth to the final stage and a certain life period in the larval stage, there will be an advantage for the larva, which protects itself by secreting a protective protein before it completes its development into a flying insect.
For the avoidance of doubt, this is a model that does not necessarily represent reality but gives a possible explanation for the appearance of a larval and pupal stage in the life cycle of butterflies. Hope I helped.
may be…
You may not have noticed but while you didn't comment here for a few minutes someone learned something here.
And for the hundredth time, just because you don't know something or can't imagine how it was created doesn't mean it couldn't happen and that there are aliens who created humans, oh sorry no, there is no problem with humans only with birds, lizards, butterflies and insects that have reincarnations, yes We will continue that there are aliens who created butterflies and they are forcing the scientific and religious governments to maintain a conspiracy that hides their existence.
Out of the box,
The quote you sent us to look for is "And a bullet to the land of Ashkhun" !! Where is such a thing mentioned in the verse you brought?
And also the verse you did bring, even the great commentators do not interpret like you, none of them claim that it is about the round shape of the earth but about something completely different. This is your personal interpretation that has nothing to do with what is said in the verse.
Maya congratulations!!
box,
I'll waste some more time on you, even though you consistently prove there's no point.
There is a difference between measurement inaccuracy, and theory inaccuracy. In theory, an inaccuracy (even a small one) can be disastrous. And you gave yourself the best example of this - if I say that pi is 22 divided by 7, it is not a great inaccuracy in percentages but it completely destroys any trace of importance in the number of pi. Ask yourself (or at least listen when I ask you for the hundredth time) why don't you look for "clues to the number" three divided by eight in the Torah? Why not forty-one divided by three? Why did the people from whom you copied these ideas without thinking (for evidence, at first you tried to give "hints for the number" 4) choose Pai? What makes it special?
Everything that makes him special is that he is irrational. As soon as you "circle" it a little, it is already insignificant. Such an error in theory is critical because it wipes out the whole thing. It's like taking the Ten Commandments and making a tiny change - deleting the word "no" at the beginning of the second commandment. In total, the Ten Commandments (not including punctuation, punctuation, etc.) have 360 characters, and we deleted 2. That is, there is an inaccuracy of 0.55 percent, something like half a percent. But this small change took the whole point out of things. He distorted the whole idea of the Ten Commandments.
On the other hand, if I take a 50-year-old man, without knowing how old he is, and do medical tests on him, and after all the tests come to the conclusion that he is 49 and a half years old, this is a full percent error. 2 times bigger than the mistake in the second statement I made. But the mistake here is not essential.
Even if the age of the world is not 13.798 billion years as it appears from the measurements, but only 13.761 billion years (within the margin of error), it does not change anything fundamental in our understanding of physics. Taking the number pi and "rounding" it to a rational number takes out of it everything that is mathematically important.
Regarding chaos, well, you can't really be answered because you're just throwing words into the air and hoping you'll catch science with your pants down. Exactly what inaccuracies do you expect to encounter due to the error in measuring times in the early universe? I do not understand. Do you think that because my clock is inaccurate and what I think happened in the third minute to the universe actually happened in the 2.99 minute, then that means there is no electromagnetic force? Or will the universe suddenly have only two dimensions? Inaccuracy in time measurement means inaccuracy in time measurement. This. If we were to have a debate here about when exactly the first photon detached from the nuclei and was released into the cosmic background radiation, it would be possible to consider the accuracy of the time measurement. But you're just trying to find an "inaccuracy", without even understanding what and why. Simply because you are very, very, very afraid that the scientist knows something that the rabbi does not.
incidentally
There is a special forum for atheists
which may be of interest to the staunch advocates of Darwin:
http://www.tapuz.co.il/forums2008/forumpage.aspx?forumid=570
י
Miracles
She wrote
"In the past, I dealt with genetic algorithms to develop an air combat algorithm for fighter planes. The algorithm evolved a genome that defined autopilot instructions for different combat situations."
What is
"In genetic algorithms"?
There is no doubt that genetic mutations can create new conditions, some of which can be beneficial.
This is actually why Darwin's theory has lasted for 150 years.
The serious problem with this theory, that continuous and continuous developments are not possible,
such as the matter of the development of incarnations such as a butterfly, an egg, a caterpillar, a pupa,
will be able to be created sequentially from small random mutations...
Even more absurd, that such incarnations could develop at the same time
In thousands of completely different animals…
Out of the box,
There is no such thing as an "acceptable mistake". This is not a popularity test. The size of the error is determined by the accuracy of the instruments used for measurement. According to the latest measurements made by the Planck satellite, the time since the Big Bang is 13.798 billion years with an error of 0.037 billion (data taken from Wikipedia), which means a relative error of about 0.2 percent.
I didn't really understand if that's what you're asking.
Miracles!
Regarding your puzzle with 4 weights, it is possible to determine on a group of 39 coins (and not just 16 coins) which coin is fake and if it is light or heavy, from a coin that is not fake.
It is better to determine in advance which coins are to be placed at each weighing and on which side regardless of the weighing results.
Moreover, Dr. Michael Shimshoni at the time wrote an article on how a weighing result can be presented by numbering so that the number of the counterfeit coin is ultimately obtained.
This way you solve a wide range of puzzles.
Out of the box.
What attitude of religious excuses are we supposed to listen to. For those who decide that everything is fine and dandy in science and you can listen to it up to the point where it contradicts what is said in the Torah and then it suddenly becomes invalid and the problem is magically resolved, or to those who decide that everything is fine and dandy in science and you can listen to everything and when you get to the point where it contradicts what is said in the Torah then we simply twist the The meaning of the Torah each time to match what science says?
Do you understand. This is the problem with this worldview. There is no meaning to anything and you can read whatever you don't want however you want as soon as it suits you to do so. This is just simple and cheap cheating, nothing less and nothing more.
You call it reading the Torah correctly (roughly). There is a legality according to which you have to read, but it doesn't catch on because this legality is constantly changing. If there was indeed such legality then you would not see the arguments of the religious all the time adapting themselves to the discoveries of science but they were simply written and clear there before science noticed it. But what we see happening is exactly the opposite. The legality in reading lends itself to discovering things that were always encoded there only after science talked about it.
This is of course an excellent defense mechanism for those who want to believe that it protects them in advance against what will not be discovered, but it is clearly cheating. You are simply willing to fall for it because faith is more important to you than integrity.
In any case, if you are ready to throw away science as soon as it contradicts what is written in the Torah, and "solve" the contradiction with magic, then simply give up the claim that you appreciate and accept science because it is basically an admission that you do not.
Regarding the runner, the goal was only to make it clear that the measurement error can be very specific. I can't tell you what causes the measurement error in the age of the universe. This is information that you should get from someone who understands the field well.
outside the box
You are amazing sometimes. Precisely to this point is it caught? You didn't even understand what I was talking about 🙂
What is even more amazing is that you argue about science - and you deny science. You talk about the big bang and probability and evolution, but you deny everything that science goes through. You deny the big bang and you deny evolution - so what are you reacting to anyway?
What are you even doing on this site? Don't you realize that you are only making me, and others, mock you and your beliefs?
Is your faith really that shaky?
Walking death
Unfortunately for those who do not study Torah, they do not know the differences and legalities in the Torah. As the claim made about those who did not study the big bang theory.
That's why he won't notice the difference between a hint and a simple.
Right.
You asked why there is no more maximum accuracy in the Torah.
The answer is in the word Torah.. from the language of instruction. In the Torah we gave the manufacturer's instructions regarding the person. That is, a commandment. for the fulfillment of the mitzvot. Information sufficient for their existence is given. And this is open information.
Regarding the runner. And difficult about an action that spreads from a point of origin to space. Therefore, the movement of a butterfly's wings in relation to the space of a storm. More like the idea of the bang.
Unfortunately
for miracles
A tree cannot be older than 5775 years.
That's right, you'll bring me proof from the number of rings, etc.
Indeed if this will be your basis. But what happens if the earth at the time of creation.. grew this field tree with the amount of rings that are already in it. of 2025 years.
True, it's upsetting to have such a thought. Don't forget the description of creation in the Torah in the first week is all miraculous and miraculous
Out of the box.
It is not clear to me what does it matter if the Sages said the world is a ball or not simply by hint or whatever and whatever.
Even if we neglect the effect that words in the holy book can be interpreted according to what comes to us according to what knowledge we wish to claim we find in it and in accordance with the spirit of the times. In the end, in this book there are things written that indicate that the author thought the world was flat and in other places things are written that indicate that the author thought the world was a sphere. Totally quite logical for a book written by different people in different periods.
For me, you will also find there a section where all the first billion digits of PI are encrypted. It doesn't mean anything. Well, that says something about the (definitely amazing) investment, creativity and lack of integrity of whoever found it. There is no reason for someone who knows how to calculate PI, who knows that DHA is a digit (it is an ellipsoid by the way, but so be it) and that it is important to him that they know this to encrypt the information in such a bad way.
We have no evidence to support the belief that the source of human knowledge of the form of Kdhua came from any Jewish sages.
But if you already claim that they had divine knowledge about PI then why 22/7? There are many much closer fragments that are surely known to the creator of the world and his sages. For people (or entities) who know that PI is irrational and can represent it much more accurately, why do it so imprecisely? Isn't it important that this information is displayed correctly?
"One of the laws in studying the Torah is that when there is an inaccuracy in the understanding of the hint it is acceptable."
Maybe I'm wrong, but for some reason it seems to me that this specifically happens all the time. Could there be a really, really good reason for that?
"Which is not the case with the simple. It is written that there is no Bible beyond the simple."
Well, I may not understand what that means at all. But it seems to me that you are constantly doing this in all these interpretations that you invent for yourselves.
Sorry but I really didn't understand your last question. But it seems to me that it should be noted that if there is an inaccuracy in the measurement as a whole, it does not mean that this inaccuracy is due to something that exists uniformly throughout the measurement. The inaccuracy can be entirely due to even one particular point. Let's say for example you measure a time for someone running between two points. The places where you are most exposed to measurement error are at the start of the run when you have to start the stopwatch at exactly the same time the runner starts running and at the end of the race when you have to stop the watch when it reaches the second point. The rest of the time you may of course screw up big time and stop and restart the watch somewhere in the middle but it's much more likely that you won't do anything that affects the accuracy of the measurement during this part of the measurement.
outside the box
I think you are wrong... the butterfly effect (which by the way - was originally a seagull) happens in chaotic systems, that is - systems that are sensitive to the initial conditions.
I don't think the big bang was chaotic. But I guess Alessandro can explain better.
In any case - why do you insist on thinking that you are the one who will find holes in the science that thousands, if not tens of thousands, of physics doctors are dealing with? Do you really think you are competing with them? 🙂
may be…
I think I misled you - choice can certainly produce new information. I'll ask you a riddle: I have 16 coins that look gold, but only 15 of them are solid gold - one of them is copper with gold plating. You only have scales - how will you find the fake coin in 4 weights?
Do you understand where you went wrong now?
Walking death
Thanks again.
Although what I am writing now was supposed to be. To Albantezo's rude response.
I will write to you.
Hazal says.. Torah spoke in human language
Therefore it also refers to man's limited ability.
When I brought along the hint. And not in the simplest way.
It is possible to allude to the creation of the world in a spherical form from the first verse.
It is true that..7÷22=3.142 which is not the pure mathematical π.. since the first four digits in π are 31415 which is an inaccuracy of 0.0005 if I am not mistaken much more acceptable than the inaccuracy accepted in theories. The big bang.. with all that my friend
Albentezo. I am attacked for a distortion of the precision of Einin which is only hinted at.
While the abstraction speaks directly about a sphere.. which corresponds exactly to the π in question..
On the other hand, in one breath he explains to me and to us that scientific calculations allow themselves an error of 0.1 percent. And this is not a hint of those calculations. These are simple..
One of the laws in studying the Torah is that when there is an inaccuracy in the understanding of the hint it is acceptable. Which is not the case with the simple. It is written that no Bible goes beyond its simple
And now I will return to the butterfly effect. There is a book called Chaos. At the beginning he writes.. that he fluttered in Japan as I imagine by flapping his wings. Could cause a storm in the US.
The idea is that a small inaccuracy can cause a substantial change over time. Is a 120÷1 inaccuracy (that is, one second out of two minutes) not significant, the effects after 14 billion years. This is the question..
I may be attacked again for misunderstanding. Instead, I would like to ask for an answer...
outside the box
Try listening for a moment. The age of the universe, as we estimate it today, is 13.798 billion years, with an error of up to 37 billion years (if you don't understand what error means here, then ask).
The mistake is not at the beginning of the universe, but rather today. I will explain to you what is meant by analogy. Let's say we have an ancient tree between 8000 years old (there are many more ancient ones), and let's say the error is plus or minus 100 years. Pay attention to something - we can know what the tree looks like at the age of a day, at the age of a week, at the age of a month, at the age of six months and so on. The mistake is in the age of the tree in its old age.
You know what I mean? It's the same with the universe - we know what happened in the first seconds, and even with a much greater resolution - our mistake is the age of the universe today...
may be…
I have previously dealt with genetic algorithms to develop an air combat algorithm for fighter jets. The algorithm evolved a genome that defined autopilot instructions for different combat situations.
Selection does not produce anything new. But - the mutations in the interpretation produce information that did not exist before. The algorithm found previously unknown combat maneuvers, much to the surprise of many fighter pilots. The maneuvers were tried after that, and proved to be better than the known maneuvers.
If you want more and more examples - just ask. But first realize that you were wrong.
Here - I referred to the content of your words. I would appreciate your response.
Out of the box.
The question is not really clear to me. What do you mean by a certain percentage of human inaccuracy? Are there human errors that affect the percentage of accuracy? that humans themselves have a certain percentage of inaccuracy?
I will try to answer anyway.
If we look again at the example with the ruler, then it is quite clear that part of the inaccuracy is a function of the person and his difficulty in deciding which points he measures in order to measure the length of the line.
Now I'm not an expert on all the existing measuring devices but some of them don't have such a decision by humans. Could there be an error that is a function of human action? (There can of course also be errors that do not result from human action) Certainly, the programming of the measuring device for example can be wrong, or the device can be calibrated incorrectly. This is one of the reasons that part of the requirements of science for a set of measurements or experiments is the ability to reproduce them in separate additional measurements and experiments.
Walking dath
I wrote this answer to Albanzo.. Unfortunately, praise goes to you and not to him... that's why I copied it.
Thank you very much for the explanation. It was even easier for me to understand. It is possible that this included the direct way you wrote... because when there is an attack, it causes a bit of emotional upheaval... and makes me less able to concentrate mainly.
Now the second question is whether there is also any reference to the possibility of a certain percentage of human inaccuracy
Walking death
I thought Albantezo answered me.. actually it's you so thanks for the answer.
So answer me the second question too please
Albentezo
Thank you very much for the explanation. It was even easier for me to understand. It is possible that this included the direct way you wrote... because when there is an attack, it causes a bit of emotional upheaval... and makes me less able to concentrate mainly.
Now the second question is whether there is also any reference to the possibility of a certain percentage of human inaccuracy
Out of the box.
Sorry for the other thing but I couldn't help myself
Out of the box.
In the world of science, things are measured to determine whether they are true or not (if a theory and its predications match the measurements, then the confidence in its correctness increases) in contrast to your world view where it is enough to want something to be true and then simply choose to believe and everything falls into place.
Measurements are something done by instruments and instruments have some degree of accuracy. So although we would be very happy if we had accurate measuring devices without any possible deviation at all, but there are none and therefore every measuring device has some accuracy range.
The ambition is always to improve the level of accuracy of the devices and measurement methods so that we can get more accurate information.
The practice is that there is a certain inaccuracy in the measurement. You can prove this yourself by taking a ruler and measuring the length of a line like that. You will find that it is difficult for you to determine exactly where you should place the ruler and determine what exactly is the point where the end of the line is. So it is very likely that the measurement of the length of this line will be exposed to an error of +- half a millimeter. Now it is possible that your measurement came out completely correct and you got exactly the length of the line, but it is possible that the line is also a little longer or a little shorter than your measurement.
I can't tell you specifically what the error range is in the measurements of the age of the universe, but there is indeed one. If I remember correctly the last time I checked the plus minus was a few hundred million years (I don't guarantee it) and it does come out to be of this magnitude.
If someone is awake and understands this matter, can help me..
Did I understand correctly that an error of 0.1 or will I add 0.001
is an accepted mistake in science regarding the age of the world.. I would love to receive an answer
Thanks
Albentezo
I understood from you that in science an error of as low as 0.1 percent or let's say 0.001 percent is acceptable so the accuracy increases. ..
Based on what I understood from you.. and from what you wrote. Because I'm assuming you went to sleep..
I will still try to ask you.. but please a direct answer without all the extras.. Did I understand correctly?
You're also welcome to ask everyone here... they'll tell you I'm right about that... try... ask... go ahead...
(I added a lot of three dots because I noticed that you really like them)
By the way, the meaning of "but I don't put it on you..." is: I put a lot on you and what you say is very important to me and hurts me, but I've already failed so many times in the comments here and I've been embarrassed by you so many times that I'm terribly afraid of you.
may be…
I'm not angry, I'm bored. I'm bored because you're boring.
I'm not trying to upset you, I'm just showing you the truth behind the things you say and are told, both for someone who has difficulty understanding like you and in case there are others who have a similar difficulty.
for example:
"I'm just showing off. Those who don't want to see (and the majority here don't want to see)
won't see…”
The meaning of this is:
I am lying for my own agenda and I am not going to explain or support this lie because I am unable to do so. T_T 🙁
walking dead
I guess what I write upsets you
That's why you go to such great lengths to upset me,
But I don't put it on you…
Miracles
"From time to time he spouts Scientology nonsense."
And what do you call what is usually emitted? Just stupid?
The mathematician - the French genius, Everest Galois, proved that a limit (series presented in different ways and describing a relationship between the circumference and the diameter of a circle) known as "pi" is a transcendental number, it's a shame that Galois left so early because of a rather stupid matter.
may be…
"Most of the writers here are only there to strengthen the ego,
And not to learn or change one's mind..."
Again, nice of you to admit it about yourself but please stop speaking for others.
Personally, I would be very happy if I didn't have to respond to nonsense like the ones you write here and quietly read the articles.
"I'm here to learn new things."
So now we're back to lying? so fast? People who want to learn don't completely ignore what they are told. You, on the other hand, are.
"Unfortunately, it is very, very rare to find people here that you can learn from"
When all your actions are making false claims without evidentiary backing and completely ignoring everything that was said to you regarding your words that may accidentally provide you with new information and teach you something then it is indeed difficult to learn anything from someone
"Please, stop messing with "me" and mess with what I write without reference to me"
Deal with exactly what you wrote, several times, after a few ignores and repetitions there is no longer anything left to refer to as "things". It's hard not to think you're lying when you're constantly doing it.
"I understand that no one here knows how to explain the matter of quantum entanglement, it's a shame..."
I don't know how to explain the matter of quantum entanglement (of course this does not mean that no one here knows). But as you have already been told to say 'explain quantum entanglement and how it works out on string theory' is not exactly a well defined question.
"I'm just showing off"
No. You lie.
You show nothing but lies. A false claim empty of content does not present anything.
"I repeat"
That is indeed all you do. That and ignoring explanations that explain to you how much the things you say are nonsense.
Strong
I repeat and write that I do not intend to convince...
I'm just showing. Those who don't want to see (and the majority here don't want to see)
will not show…
I keep saying,
"Selection" or "choice" only destroys and does not create anything new...
The problem with creating something new!
A concentrated response to all the slanderers...
As I have already written,
Most of the writers here are only there to bolster the ego,
And not to learn or change your mind...
I am here to learn new things.
Unfortunately, it is very, very rare to find people here that you can learn from...
I repeat, that today I learned about the knowledge that the Zohar writers had
about the earth
It really was knowledge that the ancient Greeks did not have
(At least I don't know that they knew what was written in the Zohar).
Please, stop messing with "me" and mess with what I write without reference to me...
I understand that no one here knows how to explain the matter of quantum entanglement, too bad...
Strong
Every once in a while he spouts Scientology nonsense.
elbentzo
It's possible..= doubt ni
He had another nickname between the two of them but I don't remember what it was.
Strong
Wait for him to tell you that a caterpillar turns into a liquid and then bring proof and evidence for it by... oh sorry, he won't do the evidence and proof part, sorry I got carried away.
Out of the box.
"It is known that the sages of Greece were worshipers of the stars and zodiac signs. Litigation and argue with Hazal.. who learned from whom.. whether the earth is round is subject to your honest judgment."
it is known? really? Which source provides a reference for this information?
If they knew so much why do we need some Greek to measure the extent of the Earth? Why couldn't they tell us this themselves?
https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%A8%D7%98%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%AA%D7%A0%D7%A1
"28 divided by 7 = π"
You don't really think that's true?
If it's not clear to you, it's completely wrong, you can check for yourself. Take a circle of some kind, take a thread, place the thread along the circle and cut it to the length corresponding to the circumference. Now place the piece of thread along the diameter of the circle and check how many times the thread goes in there.
may be…
My father told you exactly why he blocked you (even though I don't agree with him) and it has nothing to do with disagreeing with accepted opinions.
The situation has worsened so that even in simple things you are no longer able not to lie, what is going on with you?
The reason you are not answered is that you make claims and do not back them up even when you are asked and asked to do so (because evolution is not correct as an example and there are more).
Why would someone take the time to answer a question for you when you refuse to take the time to answer their questions?
Miracles
The conversation with May amuses me and makes me feel like a daily train ride.
I didn't know his scratch was Scientology. I assumed that he was just a convert who stands where the perfect righteous do not stand.
To his credit, throughout the conversation he did not go against the science of psychiatry or try to slander his wife.
Albantezo, my personal belief is that the fact that Pi is not a rational number indicates that reality is corrupted..
In corrected reality it was equal to 3 🙂
Out of the box
turn in Avi does not monitor your comments.
Maya,
Congratulations
albentezo,
What will I think about now that I will show my heart with my children?
outside the box
You talk about physics and sound stupid. You are also nothing in regards to your knowledge of the Bible.
aren't you studying??
Miracles,
You seem to recognize "maybe" or "outside the box" or both as people who responded with other names. who were they
In any case, I've been ignoring "maybe" for a long time, you can see that I haven't written a comment to him in quite a while. The truth is that the second one should also be ignored. Notice how his every response completely ignores everything he was told before.
Eitan and Albenzo
What do you treat this poor Scientologist?
box,
Listen. What you wrote sounds exactly like a drunk baby. It is impossible to understand a word from the other half. I will refer to the first half, and I will write really, really slowly so that you might understand.
22 divided by 7 is not equal to pie. Also 23 divided by 7. Also 19 divided by 377. No whole number, divided by any other whole number, is equal to pi. Can you figure it out? Maybe you should go slower: do you know what an integer is?
Pi is irrational. That's why you heard about him. That's why he's special. This is why liars try to fabricate evidence for Torah knowledge about him. No matter how many times you change the verse, or the way of counting, or whatever you want, you will never reach pi - because it cannot be expressed as a quotient of any two whole numbers. Now before you write again that in the Torah there are five pentacles and three ancestors and three parts of five is a pie, please explain to me what you did not understand about the fact that pie cannot be expressed as a portion of two wholes.
On the other half I recognize that you have a problem with the fact that we don't know very precisely how long it has been since the big bang but we do claim to know what happened in the first three minutes of the universe. This is because if you studied science, and even once in your life experimented with measurements, you would know the concept of relative error. Which means that the error of a certain measuring device (or of a value you calculated by measuring it) is proportional to the value you measured. That is, if we measure, for example, Hubble's constant, and it has a relative error of one percent - then if we calculate with its help certain quantities, their inaccuracy will also depend on this one percent. Therefore, if we make cosmological measurements today and calculate the age of the universe from them, we can get an error of a few percent which translates to 14 billion plus or minus 0.1 billion years, but when we consider something in the early universe we get times of two minutes plus or minus a second.
As usual, instead of learning and eradicating your ignorance you take pride in it and try to use it as a weapon to bash things that you do not at all, at all, at all understand.
out of the box
I'm still waiting. In the meantime, you become as snarky as a liar can be.
It's possible..
Selection definitely creates. Selection creates, for example, changes in the distribution of alleles over time.
I still don't understand what you are trying to ask about the life course of the butterfly.
Do you think all insects evolved together?
Do you think all genes related to life course evolved together?
Or maybe you think that each butterfly undergoes a private evolution?
Here is a question you can ask that has scientific meaning:
Is there a model that provides a possible explanation for the appearance of a life course that includes a larval stage and a pupal stage in certain insect species?
The theory of evolution is not a solution to the complexity of life but an explanation for the complexity of life.
I hope no commenter is here by mistake but here because his parents loved him and wanted him in their lives.
If you are not here to convince, why are you here?
And why are you so quick to announce that you stop discussing evolution?
Are you insulted?
Maybe ..
Idol worshiper - you and your lies are not welcome here. It's not just that my father kicked you out last time.
You are a pathetic liar and tired of hearing the stupid Scientology stories.
Albentezo
At the same time as what I wrote to Eitan about a small mistake in the letter W and that could bring here again the constant problem
It took a while but you noticed.. well the world was created by the essays the articles are built from letters the number of letters from A to Z in which the world was created is 22 and now the first seven words of the description of the creation that was created in those letters. Do the math again 7÷22=π.
Pay attention.. a small mistake and oops everything changes. tape. Beauty.
And now explain to me the eyes of such a zero time compared to the amount of billions of years. Of course, we don't know exactly when they started in the billions between 13 and 15 something in the middle depends on the tests, but the first three seconds that I used to count at an imprecise time are absolutely accurate. And only because I'm a coward and a delusional liar and don't understand anything... so I don't understand that these seconds belong to the beginning, exactly when they were we don't know. But for sure three. Because we have samples. A black painting created after the bang. Because surely from it you can project onto a reality that has no connection because it is similar.. like that sentence you wrote that is similar to Genesis.. Elk.. Tell me what is the connection between a black hole that was created after many large processes that are hidden in the open regarding a black hole and the beginning of the bang
elbentzo
You didn't write in your response your closet, you don't answer and in what matter.
To remind you, the forum is intended for all readers and not just for two writers.
Regarding the earth.
I was surprised to read here in one of the links from Zohar
That they knew so much about life on the round earth
which were probably unknown to the ancient Greeks...
For example: that the poles have only one hour of light per day...
There is no doubt that such information had to be received from outside the Earth...
Strong
The "selections" do not create anything new.
Selections only destroy...
How are the "new" incarnations created?
In a huge number of animals at the same time? And every individual vapor...
Strong, since all the writers here are convinced that there is no God
And that Darwin's theory is the solution to the complexity of life
I'm not going to convince any of them that they're living by mistake
And I'm not going to address the issue of evolution again...
how the
rival
Thanks. I did duplicate myself, but reading your rants makes my breastfeeding time pass with fun, so thank you 🙂
First of all, I'll just say how surprised I am that you didn't address anything I wrote. I was sure that you would give a valid reason for all the things you said, and I did not imagine that you would simply ignore them.
In addition, I will remind you that I wrote to you as a scientist about all the mistakes (very many and very embarrassing) that you wrote at the beginning of the thread, you simply ignored. remember? That's why I started calling you a coward. So when a scientist explains to you that what you write about the big bang or the processes of creating structures in the early universe is not even close to what we know, you ignore it. When they laugh at some stupid sentence you wrote about pi being 4, you complain that it's not scientific.
And you know why? Why do you ignore all the points I wrote to you? Why do you run away from the fact that you don't like my language as an excuse not to consider the fact that the Greeks scientifically studied the form of קדה three hundred years before the Sages, that all the commentators say that the meaning of the verse you brought is *not* that the world is round, that your sentence has no meaning "Allusion to the number pi", that pi is not 28 divided by 7, and its whole uniqueness is that it is not any fractional number of any other number?
because you…
coward.
Albentezo
Thank you for the language..you are a pleasant person. As a man of science, it is a pleasure to hear every word that is written... awestruck viewers...
Now to our point. Hazal brings including Rashi that man is a small world. A simple beacon man = globe = earth
Box
π is not equal to 4
π is an irrational number. If you choose to round it, you will get 3 (which would be a mistake)
Did I disprove Genesis?
Out of the box,
1. I don't need to drink water or sit, because I am completely calm. Not sure why you think I'm upset. Is it because I exposed you as a liar and a coward? Besides, you need to learn what the word "sarcasm" means.
2. You probably meant verse XNUMX: ". So it is clear that apart from having the word "sphere" and "earth" in the same sentence, there is nothing to do with the shape of the world. I am also attaching a link with interpretations by Rashi, Melbim, and others that show that the word "sphere" does not refer to the word land at all, but to the person to whom the words are said.
http://mobile.tora.ws/html/12-21.html
3. Something you will probably never understand, but the sages of Greece did not hear from some rabbi that the world is round. They proved it. In fact, they talked about a round world as early as the sixth century BC (remember, the earliest sages were in the middle of the third century BC - that is, the Greeks knew that the world was round three hundred years before there was such a thing, sages). In fact, during the time of Shimon the righteous, who is the earliest of the sages, the Greeks not only already knew that the world was round, not only did they have mathematical models of the stars, but they even *measured* the diameter of the Earth. Yes, science. They took measurements, didn't hear grandmother's stories from the Rebbe or went through a book with millions of sentences until they happened to find a verse that contains both the word "ball" and the word "earth" and then completely retroactively claimed that this is proof that the world is round.
4. Pi is *not* 28 divided by 7. The whole importance of pi, the reason you even heard of this Greek letter, is because it cannot be written as any fraction of two whole numbers (so called, irrational). The Greeks also knew this in the 6th century BC, so it is not surprising that it has not reached you yet. You are only 2700 years behind. The number 28 divided by 7 is close to pi. But the number 3 is also close to pie. So what, so "my hat has three corners" is an allusion to the number pi?
5. What does it even mean, "pi number clue"? What is a "hint to the number"? I don't need a hint that the number pi exists. All real numbers exist. Maybe your argument wouldn't be so stupid if there was a "hint that pi is irrational", or "a hint that the ratio between the vector of a circle and its circumference is pi"...
6. "Marco really likes oral sex, among other things." 28 letters, 7 words. A hint to the number Pi in the children's series "The Heart"!
Out of the box
It is written in Isaiah that God will make a ball out of you and throw you on the ground.
It is written in Daniel about a high place that overlooks the whole country.
In Joshua it is written Shemesh Gibeon Dom.
It is written in several places that the land has foundations.
On the other hand, the Greeks measured the radius of the earth, the radius of the sun and the distance to it, and the radius of the moon and the distance to it
It's possible..
You repeat the same argument that has been claimed for 150 years (probably more): I don't understand things because of God.
You have already heard and ignored many, many times that random mutations are not the only characteristic of evolution. Evolution also requires reproductive selection on individuals and the selection is not random.
Maybe the thought that you are right, everyone is wrong and chooses to ignore you comforts you. In any case, it doesn't really help you accept or consider claims that bother you.
Your clue is too small and I didn't understand the question.
Are you asking if the life cycle of the butterfly evolved all at once?
Are you asking if the different stages of the butterfly constitute its evolution?
Or maybe you're asking for a model to explain what evolutionary pressures could cause the emergence of an insect with life cycles?
Can you refine the question?
Strong
In the book of Isaiah: "A gunshot will shoot you, a ball to the land of broad hands" (XNUMX:XNUMX)
See how far a single letter mistake can lead..
Imagine what could be a small error in the calculation of three seconds that were, according to the theory, billions of years ago. of years.. I understand that you are familiar with the butterfly effect
It is known that the Greek sages who were worshipers of the stars and zodiac signs. Litigation and argue with Hazal.. who learned from whom.. whether the earth is round is subject to your honest judgment.
Another allusion to the number Pi is found already in the first verse of creation
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth"
28 letters 7 words...28 divided by 7 =π
And the reason I didn't bring this hint in the beginning...simply because the π. Also belongs to the calculation of a flat circle.
And everything I brought is simple. Isaiah...hint- first verse of Genesis...sermon- article Chazel and the secret of the Holy Zohar..
Isaiah, chapter XNUMX, verse XNUMX
"Reveal, the veil of Judah; And look on that day, to the weapon of the house of the forest"
Isaiah, chapter XNUMX, verse XNUMX
"And to the land, he will look; And here is trouble and darkness flying over a cliff, and darkness cast away"
Not sure I understood
Strong
Only those who are blind are not willing to agree that it is not possible that all the complexity of life was created by random mutations.
For 150 years they have been trying to prove Darwin's theory
Without success.
Nobody needs my rebuttals.
Because they are known but ignored...
You can continue to think that I have no proof and I'm lying...
I will give you a small hint "how can develop randomly
The cycle of a butterfly, egg, caterpillar, pupa, butterfly?
When each incarnation is completely different from the previous one?
rival
Not Gemara Isaiah.. Chapter XNUMX, Verse XNUMX
Out of the box,
Tell us the truth about the findings that disprove the theory of evolution.
I would love to learn new things, I haven't heard of it yet.
It's possible..
Have you noticed that every time someone puts you in the wrong, exposes you in your lies or asks a question you are not ready to face, you tease him (inflated his ego, a smartass, etc.) and declare that he deserves to be ignored?
I remind you in the third that you claimed to have refutations of the theory of evolution.
I would love to hear about your findings and help you publish them in the most respected scientific journal you can find.
Out of the box,
Please give the exact chapter and verse, I went to Google and found no trace of the verse you quoted.
Miracles,
He was probably confused, it is written in the Gemara and not in the Torah:
http://www.fxp.co.il/showthread.php?t=1758188
But it doesn't matter because as I showed him before the Greeks knew this long before.
Miracles
A verse in Isaiah
"And a ball to the land of Ashkhun"
Want all the details jump to Google
Out of the box
Don't give me poor excuses - where does it say in the Torah that the earth is spherical?
I want a book, chapter and verse. I don't want to read excuses.
Bring a source and then I will bring sources for what I say.
No nonsense...
And here:
http://davidson.weizmann.ac.il/online/askexpert/general_know/%D7%9E%D7%99-%D7%92%D7%99%D7%9C%D7%94-%D7%A9%D7%9B%D7%93%D7%95%D7%A8-%D7%94%D7%90%D7%A8%D7%A5-%D7%A2%D7%92%D7%95%D7%9C-%D7%95%D7%9E%D7%AA%D7%99
Out of the box,
The Greek sages knew this many years before the sages, read here:
http://lib.cet.ac.il/pages/item.asp?item=10992
Strong
It's a shame to treat you…
Another wise man…
which upsets me
This is the only scientific forum left for the plate
(if we ignore the blocking of writers who do not agree with the accepted theories)
And most of the writers here do it for the purpose of inflating the ego
And not for the purpose of enriching knowledge...
This is what there is…
rival
http://www.yahadoot.net/item.asp?id=483&cid=12
The original rival is in the holy zhar that it comes in exchange for the secret
Because in our Torah a simple structure is a hint and a requirement.
Sages comment on the word S.D.I. which is a nutricon (i.e. a hint) of the word he said to his world is enough. And they explain that the Creator inflated and inflated the world until he said enough. That is the limits.
My father thanks
K. It's really a shame that you don't write here anymore (like Maya, she must have cloned herself already :-))
may be…
Okay, the Torah is written in a missing script, yet where is it written that in front of the memory one should write: she said, she wrote, she sent...
Please give me a reference because everywhere I checked it said exactly the opposite.
It's possible..
You know how you lied and even referred to the lie in your previous response:
"Everything I wrote "that he wrote that scientists do not make mistakes"..."
Maybe you believe that this is a small lie that strengthens your position but, combined with your general lack of honesty and the disgraceful level of discussion and ignoring any argument that you are not comfortable with makes you lose any shred of credibility in the discussion.
K. This is,
Just for information
K, nice to see you again
K.
I'm lying ?
Show me what I lied about?
It's a shame that the comments here don't also include the time of writing
so that it can be addressed.
If you understand physics,
So explain the matter of quantum entanglement...
He just didn't know how to answer...
rival
You probably don't know
that the Torah is mostly written in missing spelling.
In order to save letters...
Today we use the full spelling…
Miracles
I don't know if my father is passing me on... because every detail I write seems to me to be filtered.
Out of the box
I'm still waiting. Maybe I can help you search?
my father
Hello... there is something there.
You are a live reminder of the Monopoly game.
One that puts him in jail for a few rounds.
may be…
no he's not. The only low point here is you lying and lying, and this is an ugly behavior that shows your poor moral level (and this is without referring again to your abysmal ignorance on the one hand and your stupid claims on the other). It may be that in your environment the use of lies is part of a legitimate discussion, here it is not. So I ask again, what do you want? Of course you don't want to learn, of course you can't teach, what's left? say you It seems to me that you are here to harass and pollute the site, at least that is what you are showing in your behavior so far, the behavior of a repulsive person with an ugly soul who comes to disturb and harass.
Core studies
http://www.stips.co.il/ask/1171200/%D7%90%D7%99%D7%9A-%D7%9B%D7%95%D7%AA%D7%91%D7%99%D7%9D-%D7%90%D7%AA%D7%94-%D7%9B%D7%AA%D7%91%D7%AA%D7%94-%D7%90%D7%95-%D7%90%D7%AA%D7%94-%D7%9B%D7%AA%D7%91%D7%AA
rival,
It suddenly hit me that if the Americans were to put their (self-righteous) rating of movies on the Torah, it would get RRRRR
a question. What should I answer to my child when he asks me that given the size of the nation is 60000 and there are a billion grains of sand in a square meter (just), how much does each person need to spend per day to be like the "sand of the sea"?
What to answer that?
"For you will go out to war, against your enemies; And the Lord your God gave him into your hand, and you captured his captives. And you saw, in captivity, the wife of Jephthah; And you desired her, and took her as your wife."
"In correct Hebrew, with full spelling,
Must write like I write,
If the species is known..."
Really? Please show me where it is written.
Here are some quotes from your Holy Torah:
"Why did you say my sister is, and I will take her as my wife"
"And Abimelech called Isaac, and he said, "Here is your wife, and why did you say, she is my sister?"
"You said, I will be kind to you; And I put your seed like the sand of the sea"
"He said, Moses, six hundred thousand of my feet, the people with whom I will die; And you said, I will give them meat, and they will eat, for a month."
What do you think the Torah is also wrong?
rival
In correct Hebrew, with full spelling,
Must write like I write,
If the species is known...
K.
If you bother to read what I wrote,
You will see that he will use a ridiculous pretext to avoid answering the question.
I believe he doesn't know how to answer...
Everything I wrote "that he wrote that scientists do not make mistakes"...
Just look how many words he wrote in order to discredit me..
Does a self-respecting "physicist" act in such a vile way?
may be…
You could have learned something from a professional in his field, instead you chose to act mean. It's sad to see you take pride in your ignorance, but that's your right. If you want to learn something about science, you are welcome to ask in a proper way, like a person who wants to know something that he clearly has no idea about, otherwise it's just bullying and despicable behavior on your part. It could of course be your goal actually, is this your goal? Pollute this site and harass its visitors? I would appreciate an honest answer if you can.
may be…
Are you a newcomer? You write "you wrote" and not "you wrote", you have already repeated this mistake in several different messages.
to Shmulik
Thank you very much for the referral and the insistence that I read.
Thanks to you, it occurred to me to think that maybe the infinity I understood from the Torah that speaks of him is not the same infinity that Albantezo speaks of. I went to Wiki for help and indeed saw that even the absolute infinity of Cantor does not reach the Torah's definition of the Creator.
You saved me and Albentzu heartache.. and thanks again
Possibly
"Most of the comments on this site are intended
to feed the ego of the writers"
You are talking about your comments here I understand, so you probably know.
"And not for the purpose of finding out the truth.."
What truth? The one that you keep telling us about its existence but say nothing about what it is?
Come on, by all means. Place a bet when my father blocks you one more time. That's about the only thing that's still interesting about you after we've figured out the shtick. Purposeful answers with content are no longer expected from you.
elbentzo
Just look at how many words she wrote just for your ego...
If you could answer one simple question I asked you
Regarding quantum entanglement
There was no need for all this text.
Of course you are not obliged to answer
But that just goes to show who we're dealing with here…
my father
Until now they called me delusional. On the faith of an entire people that has existed thanks to this faith for thousands of years .. even your name. Abraham is probably taken from there from the form.
They called me a cowardly liar.. I don't know what he's talking about. I don't want to understand, etc.
With all this I did not descend to these lines.. Do you also check the other comments comment by comment randomly.
What worries you so much.. The company is teaching me the big bang theory. Maybe something positive will come out of it.
Rival say miracles
Polish.
I understand that you need reason in faith.
and asks why
The direct real answer is like this.
The intellectual answer is the status of Mount Sinai that was at least 600 thousand witnesses ago. differ in their opinions and passed from generation to generation no less than this amount
You said something about boundaries
The truth is, I have never heard of such a thing. Maybe explain to me more, enlighten my eyes.
I also do not pretend to say that I know mathematics
I would appreciate it if you could explain to me how it goes together, there is no end to the borders, something doesn't work out for me. Thanks in advance
Albentezo
sorry for making you angry
Take a chair, drink water, relax..easy.easy.
Ok, let's stop the sarcasm
Did I understand?
Maybe I was wrong about a few hundred years ago, but in any case, the Gemara was written many years after the writing of the Torah.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
As far as I remember...
Out of the box,
According to what I remember correctly, the round shape of the earth is mentioned in the Gemara which was written a few hundred years ago in total, and not in the Torah. In addition, the Greeks and Romans wrote this long before and the Sages probably took the idea from them, it has nothing to do with God.
Out of the box,
Remind me why you believe there is a god?
It is possible,
What exactly did I say that showed that I was not interested in the search for truth but only in ego? Maybe it was me asking you to prove your claims? Wow wow wow, what an ego. Or maybe it's that I refused to answer the questions of a person who clearly and proven (everything is saved here, you can scroll back and check) lied and attributed things to me that I never said, in order to strengthen his agenda?
Don't you see how pathetic your insistence on putting it on me that you lied? To continue to act as if the big deal here is that I'm not interested in talking to liars, when the simple and basic truth is that you made up things I never said and then you argued and insisted that I said them (to remind you, when I asked you to prove that I said that at first you just kept saying that I said that, then you said that I said that but because The structure of the system you can't find the quote, then you started to shift the blame to me and say it's my fault that I don't want to talk to people who put things in my mouth and lie with a determined forehead).
And of course it's no wonder that something "turns out" to you - then it's nonsense. As it "turned out" to you that I don't know how to answer "my question about quantum-entanglement along with string theory..." (even though you didn't ask any questions as I explained to you. Saying "how does A and B get along" is not a scientific question that can be answered Alia from a physical point of view), or it "turned out" to you that I am a mathematician. By the way, may I ask how exactly this "turned out" for you? Because the last time I checked, I am employed in the physics department, my diplomas say physics, and I publish articles in magazines with the word "physics" in the title. So just curious...
Out of the box,
I apologize, I didn't know I was supposed to check the comments on the site every 3 hours and answer you immediately. I thought to Tommy that I'm allowed to go to work, and live my life even if it means that for a whole day (!!!) I won't answer you on the site. Also, I didn't know that the penalty for not responding immediately is that you allow yourself to decide what I agree with and what I don't. The truth is that this is a bit of good news for me. All I have to do now is wait for Shabbat to enter, write a comment "We all agree there is no God, right?", and since you won't respond to me for 24 hours, that means you agree and the discussion is over.
In case the sarcasm went over your head and you didn't understand, I disagree. You - as usual - talk nonsense. There is no problem to describe infinite sizes mathematically, and in particular to describe a space whose size is zero and the energy density in it is infinite. We only developed these mathematical tools for describing infinity (e.g., limits) about two hundred years ago, so it makes sense that you are still out of date. Maybe in the 24th century it will reach you too.
Of course, as a result, everything you wrote is one big hash. Models that contain a singularity are definitely *yes* scientific and measurable (in particular, a model of a sonic black hole with a singularity was practically built at the Technion and measurements were made on it that verified the theory). But there's really no point. There is no point in wasting even a single word on you. Because no matter what they tell you, you will never listen. You will always act like you understand what you are talking about, no matter how embarrassing your ignorance. You will always be afraid to confront the errors you have made (like you wrote that the probability of a non-dense substance in a gas state collapsing and becoming a dense substance in a solid state is low, when every child knows that this *must* happen), you will always lie when they put the truth in front of you (like you tried to change the discussion after you demonstrated that there is no You have no idea what the big bang is, and act as if we are talking about the question of whether or not there is gas in the universe).
You're a coward and a liar, and that's why you're here. If you weren't like that, you wouldn't have to go to a site that gathers people interested in science and try to make your insecurities disappear.
Out of the box
Well, I tried to hold back, but I can't help but relate at all to this collection of lies- https://www.hayadan.org.il/recycleable-plastics-2907156/comment-page-5/#comment-666409
The Hebrew language you write in exists because a group of people decided they were going to use it. They put many concepts and terms into the language that you think is the language you are talking about that did not exist in it so that they could use it at the time they live. Although there is a connection between it and the language you speak, but in the end it is about different languages. The people who did this by the way, were mostly secular and did not believe in the god you are talking about.
"Despite almost two thousand years... we held without reason or knowledge the belief that this is how a Jew should be and not to change his ways"
Yeah right. You understand that any connection between the Judaism of today and the Judaism of two thousand years ago is extremely tenuous.
"Those who put in their wisdom alone without faith have faded away"
What a wicked lie. If a person is no longer Jewish and uses his mind then he fades away? These people did not suddenly disappear from the world and neither did their descendants. They live today as non-Jews and there is nothing wrong with that. Your horrifying worldview that sees non-Jews as inferior is disgusting and shows how little your morals and your world of values are worth.
"The illogical belief to return to the Holy Land is two thousand years old"
Once again, the vast majority are non-religious people who didn't believe in your god, so the connection you point to is one big piece of bullshit.
"Regarding the scientific evidence. Unfortunately, I am not trying to obtain scientific proof of the Creator's inventions."
I don't know why, unfortunately, but of course not. It is absolutely impossible.
"The reality of the world and the universe working in an exemplary manner is the simplest and most accurate proof of the existence of a Creator."
no she is not. You are unable to even substantiate the claim that the world and the universe work in an exemplary manner. And that you claim this contradicts what you wrote a sentence before.
"When people involved in science use theories. and various hypotheses to try to erase the invention of a creator with private oversight. So you have to come out and prove that the theory is only a theory and as much as it makes sense for now"
A) People who engage in science do not engage in this because they engage in what can be observed and not in practical stories. No one comes forward to confirm the claim that there is no creator with private supervision. It's simply a by-product of what they do discover. And he is very, very clear.
b) You don't even know what the word theory means and use it in a completely wrong way.
"All kinds of nonsense about physics that we already know you know nothing about, but that doesn't stop you from making statements about what it does have and what it doesn't have"
You really won't study? If you don't understand what you are talking about just don't talk about it. Repeating nonsense many times will not make it right. It may have worked for you, but for most of the people it thinks about it does nothing except make them realize you're a fool.
Out of the box
Show me where it is written in the Torah that the earth is spherical. Only after that I will show you several places where it is written that it is flat.
outside the box
You keep arguing without understanding. Too bad…
Do you think the "group theory" is a theory, i.e. something we assume?
for miracles
We disagree about the word Torah.
Torah from the language of instruction. The mirror directs us what to do.
It is true that the word theory is taken in Ramat from the word Torah. But its meaning is a description of a situation. Check with Liba.
B. Regarding the earth, I would be happy if your honor would show me where it is written in the Torah of Israel about the earth being flat. It also seems to me that you need to study the real core that has been dating us for thousands of years
Out of the box
With all due respect, I'm not a logic teacher. If you don't understand how this is related to what I wrote in the comment then I really don't know how to help you. Maybe go and take courses in logic and reading comprehension.
I read thanks
I didn't understand what it should add
may be…
"Most of the comments on this site are intended
to feed the ego of the writers"
You are talking about your comments here I understand, so you probably know.
"And not for the purpose of finding out the truth.."
What truth? The one that you keep telling us about its existence but say nothing about what it is?
Come on, by all means. Place a bet when my father blocks you one more time. That's about the only thing that's still interesting about you after we've figured out the shtick. Purposeful answers with content are no longer expected from you.
outside the box
1) No - theory is not related to the word hypothesis. You are confusing theory with hypothesis. The more accurate translation of the word theory into Hebrew is... Torah. In mathematics, for example, there is the theory of groups. A little core study won't hurt you...
2) Too bad you don't know what is written in the Torah. It is written in the Torah, and in other books, that the earth is flat.
I asked you to concentrate on one point... you talked about two points, and you were both wrong. What is it good for?
Out of the box
You just described option 2 again in other words.
About Wiki https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%AA%D7%A2%D7%A8%D7%95_%D7%A9%D7%9C_%D7%90%D7%95%D7%A7%D7%90%D7%9D
And in general, each entry has a list of the languages in which it exists in the box on the side. You are always welcome to search there for a language that is convenient for you, even though there are usually some differences in what is written in the values in different languages.
Miracles
You probably didn't understand enough
For me, what is written in the Torah of Israel is absolute truth. Every letter of the name is precisely there. It was given by the Creator Himself to Moses and given to Joshua and Joshua to the elders. And the elders of the prophets and prophets to the members of the Great Knesset.
The Torah is pure truth.
And what is a theory about?
A. This is not the absolute truth
B. is a human hypothesis based on aggregated data. and can change. Until it disappears completely .. depends on additional data that is discovered over time.
third. An example of a theory in the extreme.. Man thought the earth was flat based on data he had. The addition of data proved to man that the world is round.
D. At that time the Torah claimed that the world is round
God. Wait, this reminds me of something in the big bang theories.. Did we say flat??
Walking death
You forgot a third option and that is
An option that would include what the Torah explanation includes.
And everything matches the scientific explanation.
Sorry, I moved to the wiki. I would be happy if it is written in Hebrew.. an easier language for me
outside the box
I hope what you said about Noah's ark is a joke... I can't believe that a person with minimal education thinks there is any truth in this horrible story.
outside the box
I gave you a chance to respectfully leave this discussion, I understand that you want to continue arguing about things you don't understand.
You keep writing nonsense endlessly, you are confused and uninformed.
Let's try to go slowly. I will start with a simple question, please tell me - what is a "theory" in science.
Out of the box
I am making you a copy paste of the response I wrote to Raphael at the time when he decided to make similar claims.
His claim was: "Scientifically there is no priority to any scientific explanation of how the world was created than to the assumption that it was created by the Creator"
You really don't understand. From a scientific point of view, any scientific explanation will always have priority over the assumption that it was created by a creator. The reason for this is that the options for the description of how the world was created will always be:
1) An option that will include only what the scientific explanation includes.
2) An option that would include what the scientific explanation includes and in addition the assumption of the creator.
And do thanks to your familiarity with this thing - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor – It is clear why you are wrong here.
And he also claimed that: "Yes, we do not give the possibility that the world was created by the Creator."
I assume you meant that the possibility that the world was created by a creator cannot be ruled out. I have already explained (as well as others) that it is not possible to rule out the possibility that there is something that you have not defined in any way. It just doesn't mean anything.
Your sentence is in fact the possibility that there is something that I have not defined cannot be ruled out.
It is clear how you can disqualify something that has not been defined in any way, how can you test something if its definition is that it is something for which nothing can be tested. It just doesn't mean anything.
And he also claimed: "For me, there is certainly a clear and absolute priority for the explanation that the world was created by the Creator, but I will not go into it here since it involves religious belief and this website is not intended for that."
who cares. so you prefer There is no connection between what you prefer and reality. My children prefer the world to consist of sweets and that eating them without a break will not cause them any health problems. Does it help them in any way? Does it change anything about the truth in the real world?
I'd rather be able to just teleport from place to place and never die while my body maintains its state from age 28 without having to eat or breathe. The world does not behave according to how we prefer things. you are not a child Grow up already.
for miracles
Even though they answer first first last last.
I will not enter into an argument or a proof
A. Regarding the soul, I won a long time ago because I was already privileged to study Torah with my late grandfather in the world of truth by making a soul ascension. That's why I don't even argue about something that I know for sure. And don't think that I didn't have time to read all the theoreticians of various kinds and among the convenient responses of various kinds and so on.
And as for being a man of faith and accepting science... it's clear that it's possible.. Moreover, a man of faith who doesn't accept the need for science denies the Sage's article that everything God created for his glory he created. And this definitely includes the need to study nature...
The simplest and most primitive example of the need in this science is Noah... who built the first plow. and Noah's ark.
Regarding the origin of the universe. Obviously, science has no source. According to science the reality of energy matter is eternal. Probably even when it was mass compressed to a zero point.. it is still a reality of matter.. or are you online to the initial way in which the universe was created. Again the same problem if the entire universe is the same point singularity. After all, it has always existed.. in one way or another.. Judaism does indeed have a source. ..and in my opinion the theories as they progress further.. will touch the real and not the theoretical infinity. which constitutes and animates all living things. And by the way, I think this will happen in the coming decades. And the third point is that the formation of life will come naturally without any difficulty.
I have no need to argue or prove anything certain.
Walking death
Thanks.
outside the box
I agree with what you said. It is possible to be a believer and accept science. But, there are 3 points that are in conflict: the origin of the universe, the development of life, and the soul. You are welcome to discuss and learn about these topics, it is really fascinating. But - don't get into a substantive argument about these three things because you will only lose.
Out of the box
It's time for you to understand that my father does not go through your comments and decide whether to publish them or not. There is an automatic filtering system that puts comments, sometimes for unclear reasons, into basements where they wait for my father to check them to make sure they are not unfit for publication. Sometimes the second section takes a long time.
for miracles
I don't know if my father entered what I wrote. In any case, it seems to me that I did not clarify my reference to science enough in what I answered you
But I wanted to emphasize. I have nothing against science. more than that. In many matters the Torah of Israel needs science. One of the most prominent things is Shabbat.
Every Jew knows and knows how serious the desecration of the Sabbath is. But in case of danger to lives. The person who determines this will be the scientist. For that matter, this is a doctor. Scientists sit and plan an elevator to sit. Refrigerators that can be opened on Shabbat without halachic problems. Science leads the world and man to a peaceful and better state.
Even for the purpose of donating organs.. we use the power of science. Calculating the holy time of the month is a pure mathematical calculation. and more. and more
And again I don't know if my father brought my objection
And the explanation I gave you.
Miracles
I will try to explain
Unwavering faith in the Creator. This is the basis of my being a Jew. "Blessed is the people who are silent on him. Blessed are the people that God
A-Lukio.. ” In other words, even if they say to a person how do you do such a thing, there is no sense in it and there is no room for reason... they answer him like this.
This language, i.e. the Hebrew language in which I am writing to you is a well-established reader that exists today in part because of this reason.. that despite almost two thousand years of decrees and confiscations. Various attempts to wipe us out. We held without reason and knowledge the belief that this is how a Jew should be and not change his ways. And those who put in only their wisdom without faith faded away. The same goes for the illogical belief to return to the Holy Land that is two thousand years old.. It did and acted its part. And all of this stemmed from the above belief on behalf and opinion.
Regarding the scientific evidence. Unfortunately, I am not trying to obtain scientific evidence for the Creator's inventions. The reality of the world and the universe working in an exemplary manner is the simplest and most accurate proof of the existence of a Creator.
But when people involved in science use theories. and various hypotheses to try to erase the invention of a creator with private oversight. So one must step out and prove that the theory is only a theory and as much as it makes sense for now. There are cracks in it that prove that it is impossible based on its explanations to claim and say that there are untruths to the Creator.
Already several times they have certainly mocked and despised the pure faith that has sustained our people and our language for thousands of years based on a theory. which is certainly not absolute.. and based on a theory that is constantly evolving and changing according to new data.
There in this place I consider it appropriate to stand as a buffer to highlight the unreliability of these claims.
And as I have said several times already. Science has an important role in creation. It leads to the future state mentioned in Rambam. The physical promise that the good will be found a lot. Delicacies will be found as dirt. (See future predictions) and therefore there will be no envy and no competition. And a nation shall not lift a sword against a nation.
And again, a distinction must be made between theoretical science and practical science.
For example, as I mentioned before regarding the singularity.
This is a theory, it has no measurable possibility. Scientists hope that in the future they may be able to measure something. This is hope. For the same reason of lack of complete information that would complete the theory of the universe. They do not know where and how the end of the big bang theory will be.. Theoretical science relies on contemporary observed data. So that before him there is neither an established beginning nor an end. He only has data for a short period of the time of creation. And with that there are those who come up against the religion of Israel.
So that's where I come in
Hope I made myself clear.. by the way Eitan was the closest to understanding this opinion
May be
You are such a wretched liar...
Darwin himself gave a rebuttal test to his hypothesis (a theory is not a concept that needs to be disproved).
You yourself repeatedly bring so-called refutations to evolution.
You are like outside the box, trying to attack in all directions, because you have nothing real to say.
There has not yet been a real religious argument against science - and a wise believer would not have entered this debate at all.
Maybe enough with the lies?
outside the box
What exactly do you want to say? On the one hand, you say outright that your faith in the Creator is blind.
On the other hand, you bring (supposedly) scientific arguments for the existence of a creator.
You repeatedly repeat the same mantra "science today cannot explain everything, therefore God exists".
You quote scientists, even though you don't accept the arguments of those scientists.
I don't understand what you are doing here. You are only hurting true believers. You make us all underestimate your intelligence.
Why?
I'm sorry that most of the comments on this site are intended
feed the ego of the writers
And not for the purpose of finding out the truth..
It is very rare that something is written here that you can learn from,
Beyond childish insults...
Too bad.
box,
It's funny because they keep telling you that you're wrong and then what do you do? The name is also wrong. Not a big deal but amused me.
Regarding your questions, with all due respect, when it comes to physics, I ask questions just like you, but unlike you, I also listen to the answers.
box,
I think you missed it.
You made an equal decision between you and Hawking except that with him the word "believe" could have been replaced by the word "think" or "hope" without causing much damage to the sentence, if at all. In addition, he does not believe in a formula, or in a theory, but hopes that one will be found. You believe in God and this word cannot be replaced by any other word. Your faith is precisely a covenant that is not justified. It can be true but in principle is not justified.
Here is what I mean about Hawking, according to the example he wrote:
"I do not believe in the existence of a unicorn, but believe in the existence of an image of a unicorn. " Hawking thinks that one might be discovered in the future. In addition, he does not worship her or make sacrifices to her (from your acceptance one could think that he is a religious man). You are the opposite of him in the sense that you do worship God and believe in him.
Therefore, the use you made of Hawking's translated sentence is wrong and I hope you will not use it as a scapegoat for any belief of yours.
Alberto wrote about Had and Arcondium (sorry, it's a bit amusing)
to the opponent
OK
Eitan.. Nissim.. Albentazo and Shmulik..
Because of your response.. I guess what I wrote is probably fine. According to the known law.. silence as thanks..
So we will continue. To date, the great theorists of the Big Bang have not been able to overcome this barrier. of the singularity.. The big bang theory does not describe the beginning of the universe at all because the initial singularity is not, by definition, describable. Another simple reason is that it has no equal in the entire universe.. Any situation we try to project onto the singularity. We don't have any measuring tool for how the material behaved. or the energy. Or the time.. we can only imagine or speculate. Hypotheses in any direction are possible..but the singularity will remain unique
Out of the box,
Both the Torah and God came from man, from his imagination.
I know this is hard for you to understand.
Positive
Thanks...interesting.
And it is true that my belief in the Creator does not belong to the convention as it is defined there.. I belong to those who believe in the Creator without reason or knowledge.
But at the same time because of the verse Israel heard.. God is one
The commandment is the knowledge of God and this, as far as I could know, is beyond intellectual achievement.. and this is in order to clothe the uncompromising faith with logic. within the treaty..
Hawking uses his genius logic (this is not an exaggeration. Indeed I believe he is a genius in his field) in order to reach a limited achievement as far as his mind is concerned. And there he continues the news..
This is the fundamental difference between the Torah of Israel, which she gave from above (Creator) to below (the people of Israel).
box,
I do not belong to the astrophysical discussion, with all due respect. I also ask questions.
I asked you to read so that you understand why your sentence about Hawking is wrong. May I demand something from you?
box,
Take two minutes to read?
Shmulik because I see that there is still no response to what I wrote from the four of you. At least for one of you. Then I'll wait... until then I'll go to the link you sent
Possibly
I think the editor is blocking. Because you bring evidence in the form of copy and paste from another source, it creates a problem of rights. Creators.. I don't think it's a personal matter.
ם
It's possible... so don't bring links, just explain in your own words which refutations you heard about, of what kind?
What, that is "too complex"? Is it "unreasonable"? Is it "unbreakable"?
Such refutations?
to the opponent
In connection with several solid scientific theories
It turns out that Annie is an out-of-the-box partner in relation to several theories.
Darwin's theory cannot be disproved as is absolutely necessary
Scientific theory.
Since the site administrator usually blocks those who bring evidence against accepted theories
I have no interest in blocking me either...
elbentzo
For a moment I thought that there was finally a scientist here for whom the truth is more important than his ego.
sorry i was wrong…
You are another ego-inflated person who only cares about inflating his own ego.
Just look at how many slanders he hurled at me because I claimed that he said that scientists are not wrong...
What an insulting claim for which I deserved to be crucified...
It turns out that you don't know how to answer my question about the connection
For quantum-entanglement together with string theory...
And it turns out that you are not a physicist but a mathematician...
In contrast, a mathematician does not need to know anything
Besides playing with formulas..
I am very sorry that I was deceived...
Out of the box,
What refutations does evolution have?
box,
Why didn't you read? I literally copied the entire post.
I ask because you are wrong. His use of the believer is fundamentally different from yours.
What do you care to read? Take two minutes.
Shmulik
It is clear to me that my reference to the word faith is different from Hawking's.. He believes in himself.. Today here, tomorrow in the grave with time also his theories.. I believe in an eternal creator of the world. That does not change. As far as you know, I did not read. So calm down
albentezo,
As part of the Twelve Steps of Repentance, all Raphael clones should come here (or equivalent places like an atheist Facebook group) and argue. So that they never lose an argument, they have a set of argumentative tools (false arguments, insults, straw man, appeal to authority, etc., etc.) and one of the main things they are immune to is novelty. Therefore Aristotelian logic does not exist (there is no result without a cause, enamoved), Newtonian mechanics does not exist (even though it contradicts the enamoved) and quantum mechanics is out. Quantum mechanics out because the implications are too serious and too confusing.
So there is no old, familiar and unchallenging. Oate innovation. Therefore, Alberto and not Albantezo.
box,
young? forty-two years old. not really young
did you read Very simple
Outside the box, if I remember correctly you claimed earlier that there are refutations to evolution, could you tell us about some of these refutations?
I think others here have asked you too.
to the fantastic four.
Albanzo the mathematician. Eitan the speaker is honest to the eye. And Shmulik, the youngest in the group..
Let us approach the matter seriously.
One of the most difficult problems faced by Big Bang scientists in their attempt to explain the "beginning of the universe" is the fact that the beginning they propose cannot be described mathematically. According to standard Big Bang theories, the initial state of the universe was a point of zero volume and infinite temperature and density. Mathematics is unable to describe such an initial state. You can't say anything about him, all the calculations go crazy. It's like dividing by 0; what comes out It is impossible to say. This phenomenon is technically called "singularity".
Is that all right?
box,
Did you read about the difference between convention and belief and understand why you and Hawking don't actually use the same word?
I don't understand why you don't answer such a simple question.
Box
Your self-deception never ceases to amaze.
Arri ignores all of Albantezo's valid arguments and focuses desperately on the gas in the Big Bang. And for what purpose?
Maybe you are trying hard to find the god of gaps?
I'm not a physicist and Albantezo can correct me, but as far as I understand, the energetic conditions immediately after the big bang did not allow the existence of gas. Only after the expansion of the universe beyond a certain energy density, free quarks could gather to form protons and thus the energy that filled the universe became plasma. The continued expansion of the universe lowered the energy density enough for the protons in the plasma to capture electrons and transition to a gaseous state.
Bottom line: gas was created, a significant time after the big bang and behaved according to the gravity that already existed before it.
All this does not change the fact that you behave insincerely and wallow in your ignorance.
Out of the box
What you are doing now is the worst thing you can do to yourself.
Instead of realizing that you're wrong, that you don't know and don't understand a lot of things, and that if you learn you'll be able to know them, you try to find the smallest possible point where you can say to yourself but there I wasn't wrong, and that you can hold on to, without realizing how meaningless it is, in the picture which includes only to strengthen yourself in your perception and leave with a feeling, no matter how small it may be, that you have it and succeeded in something.
By doing so, you lock yourself in place and prevent yourself from the exit door from the pits you are trapped in.
This is the biggest injustice you can do to yourself in this situation.
Beyond that, if you acknowledge it, not only will people here not think less of you, but exactly the opposite. Acknowledging that you don't know things you don't know is a strength in our world.
Albentezo
Thank you for the names you call me by.. at least I can live up to the sage article. Be one of the insulted and not insulted..
Regarding your wonderful expertise in the big bang hypothesis .. it seems to me that instead of telling me I'm lying you could have corrected and said that the gas was created as a result of the big bang .. and indeed the gas is mentioned as part of the process after the bang .. both Eitan and Nissim could have corrected this. And it's a shame... so there was gas...right?
liar,
(Maybe - you don't mind me calling you a liar, do you?)
You didn't find my "quote" that scientists don't make mistakes, because you made it up from your lying heart. I never said or implied such a thing. In addition, your response is poor and tries to shift the blame to me by accusing me of being irritable (I'm actually completely calm, I don't know about you), making excuses not to answer questions, shifting the blame to the forum for not allowing you to find the quote you're looking for. All in order not to apologize and say that you simply made up a lie from your heart and attributed it to me.
Also, notice how instead of standing behind your many claims about evolution being wrong, all you have to say is that I'm not an authority. Ok, I'm not an authority. But you have already written about five times that evolution is wrong, and the facts on the ground are that no matter how much you are urged, you are unable to provide a shred of evidence or an explanation for this false claim. You "announce", "herald", "explain", you say that I am not an authority, you claim that I have never bothered to check its correctness, but one thing you cannot do - stand behind your empty words.
And regarding quantum entanglement - go read. I'm not your private tutor and I don't owe you anything. I talk about physics with people on the site because I like to share the beauty I see in physics with curious people who are also interested in that beauty. People who will gladly answer my questions and help me understand subjects I am not familiar with, such as engineering, biology, chemistry and more. You are not one of those people. You are their antithesis. You may think that I'm just avoiding answering you (by the way - it's not at all clear about what because you didn't ask any questions. Saying "how do string theory and weaving work together" is not a question, it's just a collection of words. How do they work together? They work together beautifully). I really don't care. Because, as you said, I'm a physicist who understands what he's talking about. And I don't need your approval. If you want to think I don't understand strings, go away.
cowardly,
(outside the box - you don't mind me calling you a coward, do you?),
Like they said here before, you're just lying. I didn't ask you where the gas came from. I wrote to you that you don't even understand what the big bang is. The fact that *after* the big bang there was gas is nice, but it's not related. By the way, in a cosmological context, "seconds after the big bang" is unbelievably long periods of time. The bang occurred over a period of time as long as the Planck time, which is 10 to the minus forty-three seconds. That is - zero, decimal point, another 42 zeros, then one. Nothing will help you - the big bang is a spread of space-time and is not at all related to the state of the contents of the universe. in no way. You just don't (yet) understand what the big bang is and that's exactly the point. You don't even understand what it means, so why the hell are you talking about it and trying to decide what is right and wrong? Not to mention that this is only the tip of the iceberg in your scientific stupidity. The most annoying thing, of course, is that you wrote that the chances of gas accumulating, compressing and turning into a solid are zero given the expansion of the universe, when every XNUMXth grader knows that this is exactly what gravity does: causes matter to follow matter and arrange itself in clusters. Of course, there is also a scientific basis for the process of creating structures in the universe (including theoretical-mathematical models that are verified by observations), but at this stage of the discussion there is no longer any point in expecting you to refer to what is scientifically true or false.
You are a liar, because as I wrote earlier - you cannot deal with the claims (which is only logical, you are scientifically ignorant) and therefore you reinvent the questions and distort the claims made against you. But nothing will help you, because the Internet remembers everything. Everyone can flip back a page or two and see for themselves that you are writing things that are crazy nonsense because you are talking about things that you do not understand at all. And your legitimacy for this stupidity is an external agenda. In your case, religious.
Because this is the essential difference between the religious responders here and the rest of the people. People like Shmulik, Nissim, walking death, Maya, and others (forgive me all the others whose names were not mentioned) are on the site so that they can deal with the questions they have about the universe. You are on the site so that you can not deal. You come to a forum where you can talk to people who believe in science, but most of them are not scientists, and the forum does not allow them to put the weight of science on you (simply because we cannot get into formulas or studies here, or perform experiments). This is how you find a platform where you can feel as if you are arguing as equals with science and strengthen your faith. You people are pathetic, and the fact that you can't even admit that you don't understand anything about the big bang and therefore you write piles of nonsense reinforces that you are just a little coward.
may be…
What do you really want? We understood that you are completely ignorant of scientific issues, we understood that you consider your ignorance much more than what science has to say on scientific issues and that you are clearly not interested in learning (knowing and understanding) the findings that scientists have achieved with great effort while being extremely careful to match what we manage to measure in the world around us. You are not interested in learning because those who are interested in learning do not behave in a disgusting way like you which includes unjustified condescension, pointless taunts and confrontations and ignoring good and relevant answers you received (which is quite amazing how typical these traits are for commenters from certain backgrounds).
So what do you actually want? Annoy and bully? Well done, you can add this poor success to your resume, you'll probably even find someone around you who will appreciate it. If you want to learn something (and there are many here who have a lot to offer you, especially you and the likes of you), you will first have to learn the way of the earth, because without that you are just a mental pollution that is unpleasant to meet and that deepens the dislike of the way of thinking that prevails among certain religious people, a dislike that those religious people Earn honestly every time they respond in a similar way to how you respond.
It's possible..
I wrote you an elaborate response with links to all of elbentzo's responses in this article but it was sent to the basements.
I decided anyway but to chaperone you with a link to another of his comments which seems to me that with each additional comment of yours here becomes more and more relevant to your situation in this conversation.
https://www.hayadan.org.il/is-there-a-way-to-stop-beleving-in-god-30041/comment-page-75/#comment-665740
https://www.hayadan.org.il/is-there-a-way-to-stop-beleving-in-god-30041/comment-page-75/#comment-665740
box,
Did you read the link I provided? The one that talks about the difference between covenant and faith?
Because I find it hard to *believe* you did, here is the post. I hope this is not considered copyright infringement:
So here's the link:
http://sharp-thinking.com/2014/04/19/%D7%94%D7%90%D7%9E%D7%A0%D7%94-%D7%90%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%A0%D7%94-%D7%95%D7%90%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%9F/
******************************************************* *******
I believe it will rain tomorrow.
Sure it works, but only if you believe in it enough.
I do not believe! Hapoel lost again!
Whoever believes is not afraid.
In internet discussions - and in fact, in discussions in general - there is nothing more important than coordinating definitions. Well, it's more important to act like a grown man, but coordinating settings is a close second.
If we first make sure that when we both say "supernatural" we mean the same thing, we can avoid a situation where after two hours it turns out that I meant "non-material things" and you meant "a mysterious feeling that I can't explain", or in other words, we wasted Two hours in understanding what the other person means, and only now can a real discussion begin on the subject being asked.
That's why the first step in any relevant discussion should be coordinating definitions: if we're talking about issues related to X, let's first agree among ourselves what, actually, X is. And you should be attentive to Y that will come up later, and coordinate definitions about it as well.
Many words suffer from a difficult definition problem, but are taken for granted by all speakers, so it is easy to miss them. Many discussions degenerate into repeated arguments, simply because neither side notices that one of the words they both use does not, in fact, mean the same thing to both of them. Therefore, the first step of coordinating settings is to identify the problematic settings. As skeptics, we already know that the "obvious" is not understandable, and certainly not obvious, but it is important that we know how to apply the same thinking to the words we use to communicate with each other. "Well, but you know what I mean!" So that's it, after an hour and a half, it turned out that I actually have no idea.
Whoever believes is not afraid
While this is true of many words, it is important for me to focus specifically on the word "faith". People throw it into the discussion as-is, while in fact it is really loaded, only no one recognizes it.
The main problem is that when you say "faith" in Hebrew, they may mean two different terms.
I will try to avoid deep philosophical definitions, because who has the power. (and the definition on Wikipedia is a bit confusing)
Belief is the state of mind in which a person perceives something as true. This is a concept that originated in philosophy studies, as far as I know, so it's no wonder if you've never heard of it until now. It's a real shame that they don't teach it in school, but there's nothing to be done.
In this sense, I believe that I am now sitting on a chair, I believe that my wife loves me, and I believe that the earth is spherical. When I imagine a unicorn, I believe I'm imagining it - but I don't believe it. I do not believe in the existence of a unicorn, but believe in the existence of an image of a unicorn. Practically speaking, a great many of my thoughts are actually the art.
Note that it is possible to hold a covenant about something that is not real. Crazy people may hold the convention that they are Napoleon. This convention is wrong, but possible. The convention is only the state of mind that something is true, regardless of its factual situation in reality.
"Knowledge", by the way, is a subcategory of the contract, which is sometimes defined as a correct and justified contract. That is, the treaty that also corresponds to the state of affairs in the world, and I am also justified in holding it. For example, the one who believes he is Napoleon, does not know he is Napoleon - he only believes it. But because it is not true, it is not knowledge (under this definition of knowledge, that is).
Faith is a type of agreement - specifically, one that is not justified. Maybe real, maybe not, but I have no justification to own it. "Justification" here is a logical, technical concept, which we won't go into, but in short, it means that the conclusion can be drawn from the assumptions I have (that there is a basis, often factual, that can be used as a premise for me, and through which I can show that the conclusion does necessarily follow).
Here's an example: I believe I have a dinosaur in the fridge. Why? So. I cannot justify, give reasons why I hold this belief. If I could - for example, someone sold me a "dinosaur egg" that looks convincing, and I put it in the fridge - this is no longer a belief, since the belief is justified (perhaps it is even knowledge, if it really is a dinosaur egg, because then it is a true and justified belief). Similarly, if someone could prove the existence of a world to which souls go after death, or present its existence factually, there is no longer any need to believe in such a place - thanks to the proof, one can know that it exists. If I know something, I don't believe it; If I hold a belief toward something, this means that I hold a belief toward it without any foundation, and therefore cannot know it.
As a skeptic, I try to hold as many justified true arts as possible, or in other words, as few beliefs as possible. This is because belief is a problematic piece of thought - or it is true, but for the wrong reasons, so it cannot help me find other true beliefs; Or it's just not true. I see the unwarranted charter as a danger to my normal thought process, because if I got one it's a sign that my critical filter isn't working properly, and I might get more. I try to go where the facts and evidence point to - that is, I necessarily commit myself only to things that can become knowledge, and never to beliefs (because facts, as mentioned, provide justification, and therefore, necessarily, do not lead to belief).
Unfortunately, our brains are actually well wired to absorb and form beliefs, but this has already been expanded upon in many other places on this blog.
Trust center
But we are not done yet, because when you resort to using the word "believer" in more everyday things, such as "I believe that Uri is not lying to me, and his name is really Uri", it is already a matter of trust. Broadly, for the purpose here, "trust" is the willingness to accept the things that person X says as truth. (Look, I adjust settings!)
Trust comes from experience - if my friend tells me that his dog is sick, I believe him, because for many years my friend has been telling me things that turned out to be true. In addition, experience shows me that people in general tend to tell the truth, and that society has certain norms. For example, I don't doubt that Ori is called Ori - the trust in the social system is so great, that I need a good reason to even start doubting it. All these are the art, and even knowledge, since they are justified, as mentioned, by experience. Experience provides me with facts that justify the trust I place in person X.
While this is sufficient justification for day-to-day life, extreme situations require a fresh look, and experience may certainly turn out to be insufficient. Let's look at two prominent situations, when I'm asked to trust without good reason, and when I'm asked to trust too much:
1. Suddenly a complete stranger comes to me, tells me he is my brother, and asks me to lend him 500 NIS. If I agree, if I am willing to trust him, then I do so out of faith only. This is an example of bad faith, one that is the covenant that is not justified. I think we would all agree that this is blind, foolish, harmful trust. Because I would like to see proof (facts) that he is really my brother. I want justification for this belief, which I am asked to accept now, "X is my brother". I want to know this is true, before I take action based on these details.
2. My friend Udi comes running and tells me that he was kidnapped by aliens to a world full of ice cream. I have a lot of faith in Audi, a good friend, but his claim breaks the things I know about the world, very radically. This excessive difference, between what is known and what is claimed by Audi, is a good reason to start doubting it (as mentioned before, there are limits to trust, and here is one right here). I will ask you for proof, to justify his words, so that I am ready to accept them as true. If, for some reason, I am willing to trust him so completely that I will completely agree to accept everything he said as true, simply because he is a close friend of mine - then I am an idiot, for reasons already stated.
One last word before closing
Specifically, the word "treaty". Most of you probably didn't know about it before this post, but now, hopefully, you think it's useful and may use it in the future. It helps you see things from a new angle, separates concepts that you previously thought were basically the same thing, and does it in a way that will benefit you in the future. The importance of inventing a new word should not be underestimated - when you recognize something separate, define it separately, even if it is in the middle of the discussion, stop everything and give a name to the new detail you want to distinguish. It will often turn out that this is the main point and that is where the bone of contention lies.
Start using the word "treaty" in the right places, and distinguish between a well-established and a non-well-established agreement, and you will save yourself time and effort. Amen.
*******************************************
may be…
Here, I'll make it easy for you. Links to every comment by elbentzo in the comments of this article.
https://www.hayadan.org.il/recycleable-plastics-2907156/comment-page-2/#comment-666208
https://www.hayadan.org.il/recycleable-plastics-2907156/comment-page-2/#comment-666233
https://www.hayadan.org.il/recycleable-plastics-2907156/comment-page-2/#comment-666235
https://www.hayadan.org.il/recycleable-plastics-2907156/comment-page-2/#comment-666242
https://www.hayadan.org.il/recycleable-plastics-2907156/comment-page-2/#comment-666256
https://www.hayadan.org.il/recycleable-plastics-2907156/comment-page-3/#comment-666262
https://www.hayadan.org.il/recycleable-plastics-2907156/comment-page-3/#comment-666263
https://www.hayadan.org.il/recycleable-plastics-2907156/comment-page-3/#comment-666264
https://www.hayadan.org.il/recycleable-plastics-2907156/comment-page-3/#comment-666289
https://www.hayadan.org.il/recycleable-plastics-2907156/comment-page-3/#comment-666295
It is possible..in light of your responses, there is good reason to doubt your sincerity.
It is not difficult to see that your goal here is to sting, insult and misrepresent in order to strengthen your faith.
Albantezo seems to have enough integrity and common sense to be able to discuss with you even topics that are not in his academic expertise.
I am a biologist by training and I would be happy to discuss with you the evidence that you understand disproves the theory of evolution.
I would also love to hear about your education and your sources of knowledge that helped you reach your discoveries.
elbentzo
The attribute here does not specify the time of the message,
Except that it only shows the latest messages.
Therefore, I did not find your reference to the matter of "scientists' mistakes"
which upset you so much.
You deserve to be insulted like a little child by every word that is written about you.
There is no point in insulting you.
You gave me the impression of a physicist who understands what he is talking about.
That still doesn't make you an authority on a subject like evolution...
You may not have written what I attributed to you or I did not understand it.
Therefore, I repeat what upset you so much.
Hoping your upset wasn't just a run for not answering
Regarding quantum entanglement,
I would love to hear your opinion on the matter…
Out of the box
That's what he wrote
"1. Show me you're right and I'm wrong. All our knowledge about the creation of stars and galaxies is wrong and actually matter *does* not attract other matter as a result of gravity and creates structures, but it is a process whose probability is low. Or the big bang is some explosion of gas and not a spread of space-time from a singular point. Or any of the nonsense you wrote."
He did not ask where the gas appeared in the big bang.
You want to tell me that your answer is that when you choose specific words from what he wrote and invent a new question to answer it is considered answering?
Albentazo's question is simply where did the gas appear in the big bang.. well in the big bang theory after the dark period.. first appeared the gas that cooled and it took about 400 million years for the process of star formation.. in any case this is what the hypothesis says as of today. I just got attacked by Albanzo.. who claimed I was lying about the formation of the gas in the big bang. So that's part of the answer to his teasing question
Out of the box
It's clear that the-m from-f-h-d-y-m.
he who believes is not afraid.
If you were secular like them and you knew what was waiting for you for all your sins, wouldn't you be afraid? So they convince themselves that there is no creator of the world so that they can avoid taking responsibility for their disgusting actions.
Don't get excited about them. The Creator is waiting for them with soap to wash them well... 🙂
Out of the box
What exactly does what you wrote answer and how do you think it answers part of section 1?
It is possible,
I would really like to help you with interlacing and string theory. Unfortunately, I cannot do this until you show me exactly where I wrote that - and I quote you - "scientists are not wrong". If you show me where I wrote that, we can move forward and talk about interweaving. But if you don't show me where I wrote it, that means you're a liar who puts words in my mouth to serve his own agenda. In that case, I don't think you need me to explain to you about interweaving. After all, you can make things up on your own and then say that I said them, so why should I make an effort?
In case it's not clear - I have no interest in talking about science with a man who flat-out lies, claims that I said things that I never said, claims that one or other ideas are wrong, and then when asked to explain, he runs away. And this is not the first time. When I asked you to explain why extracting energy from a black hole is science fiction, what answer did you give me? And when I asked what studies on gravity should be performed but are not performed? There is a reason why you ignore the questions you are asked, ignore that your attention is drawn to the mistakes you make and nonsense you say. Just like out of the box. Just like Raphael. just like someone It is a symptom of a disease that you all share - you are not interested in science. You are interested in coming to a scientific forum and being defiant. annoy people. Spread your bullshit to alleviate insecurity. That's why none of you ever faced a claim that was made against him. Never admitted a mistake. Because you have no interest in researching the truth. You are a bunch of cowards who just want to make some noise.
may be…
Maybe go back to the sewers? Tired of your lies.
It is possible,
You didn't step on any warts. Simply for some reason the religious commentators here like to spread promises without cover. The declaration by Rish Gali (more than once and twice!) that the theory of evolution is wrong. Come on, prove it to us all. And if you can't prove it, you'll accept that there are things in the world that you just don't understand. It's not that far-fetched, considering that you don't bother to study them (to be fair, we'll note that so far you haven't demonstrated ignorance about evolution, but after the nonsense you've spewed about gravity not being studied, for example, or that extracting energy from a black hole is science fiction, it's quite clear that you have - Like your "outside the box" friend, a tendency to talk a lot about things you've never read a paragraph or half a paragraph about in your life).
Maybe, maybe tell how you disproved the theory of evolution instead of stinging and winking?
I am a biologist by training and would be happy to help you publish your findings as an academic paper.
elbentzo
I think I stepped on a wart... sorry.
The very prize you assign for disproving Darwin's theory,
Shows how much you believe in her.
I appreciate you as a physicist, not going into another topic.
Regarding quantum entanglement, and its relation to string theory.
I would be happy if you would address this, or direct me to the answer (if you have commented on the subject).
I asked you about this in another thread (an old one, which I can't find again).
may be…
Want to bet how long it will be before my father blocks you again?
Albantazo answer to part of section 1
Sorry for the ignorance.. but I found the following written on a scientific website.. By the way, the scientist also brings an article on this topic..
At the beginning of the Big Bang, only the light elements - hydrogen and helium - were created. As they became denser, in a process of hundreds of millions of years, the first stars were formed and within the cores of the first stars heavier elements were formed.
At the University of California in Santa Cruz, they were able to observe the primordial matter, gas clouds that were formed seconds after the Big Bang (according to the predictions of the "Big Bang" theory). The observed gas clouds, according to the examination of their spectrum, contained only hydrogen and deuterium (heavy hydrogen) but not any heavier element.
It is as if if they admit once they were wrong, they will have to part with their faith. This is amazing. Rashi, he was never wrong. Maimonides, in a dream at night. No rabbi has actually ever been wrong. can't be wrong. There is no such thing.
Yosef Ovadia was wrong once... when he thought he was wrong
Outside the box is never wrong. Well
Shmulik, did you also start with Alberto? What will we be?
And of course,
Lots of words, but no content. Just an escape. Tell me, does anyone remember what you call someone who is afraid to face what is in front of him? "Lachada"? "Kahdan"? Something like that…
You wrote things about the big bang that are wrong. I blamed you for your many embarrassing mistakes. Now there are only 3 options:
1. Show me you're right and I'm wrong. All our knowledge about the creation of stars and galaxies is wrong and actually matter *does* not attract other matter as a result of gravity and creates structures, but it is a process whose probability is low. Or the big bang is some explosion of gas and not a spread of space-time from a singular point. Or any of the nonsense you wrote.
2. Thank you for talking about things you understand *nothing* about. You know the truth. Who do you think you work for? Everyone here can see that you don't understand anything, and you also know that you never learned the things and that you don't understand anything about them. So why do you even keep wasting air?
3. Run away. Change the subject. Blame us for being stupid. Write an unrelated quote about the word infinity. Prove to all of us that you're a coward (and that's in addition to being ignorant, because you obviously don't understand a word of anything you write about).
Writing a comment about the fact that we are afraid. that we don't want to admit the truth. We get out of the tools. I have never seen such a serious case of "the wrongdoer being wronged". A cowardly man who can't even admit that he wrote something wrong. Well, you coward. You wrote a sentence about the Big Bang - answer now! Is this sentence true or not? If it is true, prove it. If not, thank you for talking nonsense.
coward.
may be…
Do you want to show exactly where I wrote that scientists are not wrong? Or would you rather we not check your lies and just ignore them?
And as I already wrote, you can "pretend", you can "mislead", and you can call like a rooster. This does not make the theory of evolution wrong. This makes you one of those people who say it's wrong but when asked to prove it they: a) run away with their tails between their legs.
B) write a pile of mistakes.
C) write a pile of lies.
Please post your evidence that the theory of evolution is wrong. I remind you that the Nobel Prize comes with a million dollars (approximately). And yes - in my decision I found it appropriate to check its truths. I'm not a biologist, and of course there's a limit to how much you can study a subject outside of your discipline, but I've definitely read and checked, and I also have friends who are biologists and who have made testing the theory of evolution their life's goal. So come on, come show us all wrong. Post a rebuttal, get a million dollars. What is wrong?
outside,
Alberto answered you and I want to add something to his answer.
This is how you wrote: "He is allowed to believe... after all, he is Stephen Hawking... and I am the smallest of all, I am not allowed to believe that there is a Creator..."
At the time Camila who used to comment from time to time provided a link that explains very well the difference between Hawking's use of the word believer and your use and the difference is huge. A difference of heaven and earth if you will. You certainly won't change your mind about anything someone here tells you, but the following link describes how to correctly use the word believer in Hebrew, so at least your arguments will be better:
http://sharp-thinking.com/2014/04/19/%D7%94%D7%90%D7%9E%D7%A0%D7%94-%D7%90%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%A0%D7%94-%D7%95%D7%90%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%9F/
By the way, I don't understand why you keep using "...". It's a clever way to make us assume you meant something without actually saying it. What does "he is Stephen Hawking..." mean?
Is Stephen Hawking the king? Is Stephen Hawking God? What it means???
elbentzo
She claimed that scientists are not wrong.
And you continue to claim that the accepted theory of evolution is correct
(Or in your words:, if I claim it, it doesn't mean it's true...)
So I want to inform you that it is not true, even though it is supported by me
the scientific community.
I guess she didn't see fit to check her truths...
To the three geniuses of science
I cheated. delusional I don't know what I'm talking about, etc., a coward...etc. The funny thing is that the passages I bring are passages that the great scientists talk about. Only from an angle you don't see it. That's why you are unable to digest it.. and my father also takes down my comments.. what does he have to fear.. interrupts that lead to one clear conclusion. There is much more in this creation than the perception of the human mind.. and it boils your blood. When someone just says it to your face.. and brings a solution that in the end.. somewhere inside you know that this is the real solution. The one who is really afraid is you. But don't worry, you will come to this conclusion with all of science.. There is a creator of this complex world.. There is a master of beer. This truth throws you off your feet. You are afraid to admit it.. even though step by step you are drawn to this conclusion. I am becoming childish and foolish and everything.. but if you insist and investigate well in this direction you will come to this conclusion. Don't worry Einstein already reached part of the conclusion .. be in good company
To Eitan Nissim and Albantezo..
Sorry for the ignorance.. but I found the following written on a scientific website.. By the way, the scientist also brings an article on this topic..
At the beginning of the Big Bang, only the light elements - hydrogen and helium - were created. As they became denser, in a process of hundreds of millions of years, the first stars were formed and within the cores of the first stars heavier elements were formed.
At the University of California in Santa Cruz, they were able to observe the primordial matter, gas clouds that were formed seconds after the Big Bang (according to the predictions of the "Big Bang" theory). The observed gas clouds, according to the examination of their spectrum, contained only hydrogen and deuterium (heavy hydrogen) but not any heavier element.
Pathetic as expected.
At first you took the fact that the words "infinity" appear in mathematics (and in particular in the mathematics of physics) and by the very existence of the words you tried to make a stupid link to acceptance. Well, the word "kibbutz" also appears in the book "Aya Pluto", which is known to be from the word "group", and in group theory they also talk about groups, and in physics aspects of group theory sometimes appear. Meaning - there is a connection between our universe and the book "Aya Pluto"! Just pitiful…
Hawking can believe what he wants. you can too But in science faith is worth nothing. Hawking does believe, but it doesn't bother anyone. That's why there are people who for years, from morning to night, try to unify quantum mechanics and relativity. Actually, I am one. This is exactly my area of physics (I'm a theoretical physicist), and this is what I do. Why am I doing this? Because I don't care what Hawking believes. I am interested in what can be proven with mathematical tools. What can be tested against reality in an experiment. If you want to believe in something - believe it. No one told you no. The problem is that your belief is trying to dictate reality. Like for example, the very fact that you *believe* that there must be divine intervention to create the universe, the stars, galaxies, etc. - causes you to decide (without any knowledge, without any evidence, without any understanding of the theory) all kinds of things about the big bang. Gases, density, all the pile of nonsense you wrote earlier that has nothing to do with our scientific knowledge (verified by observations) and not even coincidental.
But of course you continue to ignore it. Because in addition to being ignorant, you are also a coward and cannot bring yourself to say the words "I write about science, about the big bang theory, about evolution, I write about what is true and what is not true, I write why there is a great chance and why there is a small chance, and all that Without even knowing *what* the big bang is. without reading a single article on the subject. Without taking any course, without understanding the basics. And all this, because I have an external agenda (the Torah) that determined for me what is right and what is wrong."
Did we say coward? Did we say ignorant?
Box
It's discouraging, like talking to a child or a Chinese speaker
What is the connection between what you copied and the arguments?
You avoid questions that scare you with the finesse of an elephant.
What is the difference between the quote about singularity and what is being asked?
Has anyone claimed anything about the existence of a singularity with infinite space-time density and curvature?
If anything, the only one who would claim that is you (you don't "believe" in theoretical physics and therefore, according to your understanding, there is no such thing as a singularity because it was only predicted and not yet observed).
Maybe stop lying to yourself and instead try to learn why Hawking believes that in the future it will be possible to unify the theories.
You have the right to believe in pink fairies too, what you cannot do is decide that your belief requires the universe to behave as you would like it to behave and not bother to check how it really behaves.
outside the box
You are allowed to believe too. The problem is (not the only one) that you are lying to yourself that science has a problem that you know how to solve. And what's more, you insist on convincing us of this nonsense.
Stephen Hawking, by contrast, knows what he's talking about.
Eitan Nissim and Albentzo...another excerpt and this time from Steven...."In one of the last chapters of the book, Hawking tries to discuss the topic of the theory of everything, but he claims that one of the obstacles to creating the "theory of everything" is the difficulty in uniting quantum mechanics with the theory of relativity. Two theories that seemingly contradict each other, despite the practical use of both. Despite the difficulties, Hawking believes that in the future the "equation" will be found that will explain the entire universe and what is inside it."
He is allowed to believe... after all, he is Stephen Hawking.. and I am the least of all, I am not allowed to believe that there is a creator of the world as defined in Hasidism, which is because of his being limitless, so he carries opposites.
Eitan Nissim and Albantezo...
Obviously I'm not a great scientist like you. But pay attention. This section is taken from Wikipedia..." Singularity, as well as uniqueness, is a point in space where the density of matter is infinite. General relativity allows for the existence of singular points, and predicts an infinite curvature of space-time." ..infinity is mentioned twice here..and it is uninformed like me who understands that science is talking about an infinite reality. It is possible that 'modern science is getting close to concluding that there is such a thing called endless light.. (see Kabbalah entry)
Box, you are acting childish
Despite what you've been told over and over and over again, there are no facts in science.
There are stronger and less powerful theories.
I repeat what I said, you pretend that science is a belief that you must fight in order to strengthen your belief.
If you are adamantly against the big bang theory, try to learn the reason for the existence of the theory or at least learn what the word theory means.
If you had a basic understanding of science or a shred of integrity, you would understand that "practical" science is simply using theoretical science for some practical purpose.
There is a reason why the big bang theory is, at the moment, the accepted theory. There is a reason why alternative theories are not currently accepted. That you are not willing to learn the reasons for this is your problem and yours alone.
Albantezo, in my opinion, does not resent "hurting the calf of science" (again your understanding that science is faith and therefore competes with your faith). Albantezo resents that you assert emphatically and absolutely that theories that harm your faith are not true without understanding or trying to understand these theories.
The ignorance you are proud of is outrageous.
box,
You mean theoretical science like gravity? Or to theoretical science like electric current?
You, like many before you, are too ignorant to understand what science is, and therefore you flee to an approach called "scientific empiricism", which disappeared from the world nearly 400 years ago and rightfully so. An attitude that says, "If I haven't seen it with my own eyes, it's not true!" And as stated above, according to this approach there is no such thing as electrons or electric power, and to the best of our knowledge the reason things fall to the ground is because of mouths and we have no way of predicting what the pressure will be on a bridge when it is being built. You didn't invent the word theory, but you certainly prove to all of us that you don't know what it means.
And as expected - not a word about your description of the Big Bang being about as accurate as saying that the Torah says that a goat created the world by kicking Walt Disney's ass. You have shown that you have no clue about the Big Bang, that you are talking about things that you never bothered to research or check if others have researched them, and when you are confronted about your mistakes (the many and embarrassing ones are crazy - Rabak, not knowing that gravity causes objects to follow each other?!) you run away. Because you are both ignorant and a coward.
outside the box
Aren't you tired of talking nonsense???
"There is no basis for hypothetical theories"?? Doggery, between us, you don't understand a single word of this sentence, do you?
Albentezo
I hope I spelled your name correctly..
It's good that I'm not near you and you would have stoned me for insulting the great and terrible name.. a theory and I repeat the big bang theory.. don't forget.. it's a theory not a fact. This is an opinion, a hypothesis.. and I am not the one who invented these words. By the way, do you know that there are scientists who come up with other theories about the universe.???!!!
Maybe I'm not a genius in science like your honor.. but I'm smart enough to distinguish between theoretical science and practical science.. it's a shame you can't make this simple distinction.. I'm sorry if I hurt the calf of your sacred science..
Out of the box,
You write about shame. Are not you ashamed?
You wrote things about the big bang, about the creation of stars and galaxy clusters. You were made wrong. You have been shown that you are talking about things you have no idea about, that your most basic definitions are complete nonsense (is the bang a cloud of gas? Say, are you okay?), and that what you wrote as probabilistically impossible is in fact warranted.
So maybe instead of ignoring it, stand up bravely and without shame, and show me that I'm talking nonsense and that you're the one who's right, or admit that you're talking about things you have no clue about? That you know about the Big Bang about what you know about Chinese writing styles in the third century AD, but you allow yourself to talk about them and declare what is true and what is not, what is reasonable and what is not, what we tested and what not...?
Just another fool who is so afraid of science and knowledge that he tries to take ownership of it. But because you lack the intellectual tools to take ownership of it (knowledge. curiosity. talent. diligence. open-mindedness to accept a result even if it doesn't line up with your worldview), then you take ownership of it through religious means ("The Torah is right, and science will soon discover it !”). Plus, until you face the fact that you wrote a bunch of crap that would have put a high school physics student to shame, you're also a coward.
It is possible,
If you really appreciate me, maybe you'll start by spelling my name correctly for once. Go ahead and say where I was wrong (instead of writing "I want to expose you to a fundamental mistake" and then burst into a monologue that has nothing to do with what I said, come see exactly what I said was a mistake and explain why it was a mistake).
Besides, I want to point you to a very fundamental mistake: the fact that you comment on the science website and write that the theory of evolution is wrong, does not make it so. Good luck later.
Miracles
I am glad that you also agree that there are different plausible hypotheses...for the formation of life. So not all of them are clear knowledge, all of them are opinions..nice. The same goes for the bang. Nice, although we are very close, it's just a shame that we lack some basic data...but we believe that we will find an answer to that as well. What comes out of all this is a simple thing that there is no basis for hypothesis theories.. because the basis lacks the most preliminary data. And then when there are these data.. then the theory will be stable. Ok, I accept .. but don't be surprised that in the end science will come to a conclusion .. that there is someone who drives the entire system out of his own desires and his own plans with his own logic .. and his abilities are higher than the universe .. and in fact the universe is smaller than him. Including the reality of time, energy and matter.. and in this I believe that science is striving for and there it will reach, whether it wants to or not.
outside the box
As Eitan explained to you - today there are several hypotheses for the formation of life. Maybe one of them is true, maybe life was created in a process that we haven't thought about yet, and maybe we will never know what exactly happened, because there will be several hypotheses with similar probability.
It does not follow that there is a God.
As for the formation of the universe, if it was formed at all, the situation is even better. We have an amazing understanding of everything that happened up to a stage very close to the Big Bang. Our tools are constantly improving, including mathematical tools.
We have no need to assume that there was a "creator". On the contrary, adding a creator increases ignorance, explains nothing, and certainly does not give us any ability to predicate, which is the touchstone for science.
Your fighting does not add respect to religion. You only display a lack of knowledge, a lack of understanding, an inability to listen and you repeat over and over the mantras of all kinds of charlatans who supposedly know more than scientists.
Do yourself a favor and learn about the real world. If you feel the need to convince us of the rightness of your belief, then it is probably not justified enough for you either.
Alberto
Because I really appreciate you
I want to put you on a fundamental mistake.
Scientists commit themselves to accepted theories,
Even after they are present to know that they are wrong.
Take for example the Darwinian theory of evolution.
All that is true in this theory is that life evolved gradually, from the simple to the complex.
All other parts of the theory are completely wrong...
Anyone who tests the theory rationally
Realized that she is completely wrong, given the findings
that were discovered in the last hundred and fifty years.
Despite this, scientists continue to adhere to this wrong theory...
Another correction.. as described in the theory
Should be. An example of a mistake
Strong
Finally.. we agree on one detail... the formation of life on Earth.. the initial basis for all existing life. The beginning of the theory of evolution. Everything is based on an unknown puzzle.
Then build on an existing reality. The so-called Chaim Sabrot... theories.. when the initial basis does not exist disappears from the equation... like the question that also has no answer... where does the material come from... or the energy... then the theoretical ideas are built in several different shades... and then according to the opinion of the majority they say that this is the most accepted theory. And then they come and say with full confidence... we know that's how it was... and train the theory so much that it becomes, so to speak, knowledge. And not a theory..
I have no objection to science as long as it is experimental science that brings solid facts.. To this day they cannot create an experimental situation on the scale of the formation of the universe. All under limited laboratory conditions within computer simulation and the like. A good example of computer simulation that was done written in the new article about the comet (see there) All in all it is about a small comet very close to the earth (relative to the size of the universe) that is in our time and under the conditions we know today... and some mistakes have already been found... and unexpected surprises expected And this already shows a lack of knowledge about a tiny part of the universe.
With all this they pretend to tell us that we know so and so.. as his honor writes.. we know the duration of the existence of the universe.. perhaps due to my lack of knowledge but if I am not mistaken they recently came to the conclusion that the duration of the existence of the universe is different from what they assumed (correct me if I'm wrong) with all this pretending to say we know.. please at least use the right words say we guess.. or we believe.
And even more so when so much data is missing regarding the formation of the universe.
A. The distance while we build the assumptions based on a given current situation
B. There is no laboratory experiment capable of creating in a laboratory form the initial data of the formation of the universe. Both in terms of the enormous size and in terms of the tremendous power and in terms of the state of the particles at the beginning of the expenditures according to the theory. We have no possibility of repeating the experiment as the theory suggests
And for all this they stand proudly and say without any shame..
we know
Box, first of all I want to congratulate you on a readable response.
Plus, this is your lowest error response to date.
I think I understand the source of your errors. You think there is a competing religion called "science" whose fundamental beliefs compete with or contradict the religion you believe in.
It is important that you understand, science is not a religion and is not based on a belief system.
It is "obvious" to scientists that before the development of life, there were molecules here. This is because even now there are molecules "here" ("here" and we are made of molecules). What we know about the behavior of molecules from experiments and observations, suggests to us that even before there was life on Earth, there were molecules and that the behavior of the molecules and the laws of physics have not changed.
We also learn from experiments and observations that in the past, there was no life on the surface of the earth and that throughout its two billion years of existence, life has developed on it and that their complexity and diversity (for the most part) is increasing.
Based on what we know from the fields of organic chemistry, physics, geology and other sciences, we can describe possible scenarios that can create (or receive from sources outside of the universe) organic molecules that can become replicating molecules that will undergo selection that can create a replicating protocell. In addition, we can assume that once a replicating cell exists, it is subject to selection and competition between those cells, which causes changes in the behavior of the cells and their properties.
You were right when you said that the formation of life is one of the great mysteries of science. All we can do is speculate what was based on existing knowledge.
Such a claim is not "unscientific" but on the contrary: it defines science and the assumptions behind it that distinguish it from religion: the assumption that we do not possess perfect truth or knowledge and from our lack of knowledge we must investigate, question and speculate in order to increase our knowledge.
for miracles
It is clear to me that before life as we know it existed, there were molecules, and after a number of many and unexpected stages, these molecules underwent a serious transformation: they became complex systems capable of replicating, transmitting information and initiating chemical reactions. However, the first step that led to this transformation still remains one of the greatest mysteries in the world of science. And maybe you will also say that it is not scientific
And again we are back... to the point where a person with an external agenda decides that he understands more than the scientists... who dedicate their lives to researching a certain subject... and that he can come and decide (based on zero research, no evidence, no experiments, nothing) what is true and what is not... and write to us that the big bang is a cloud of gas... that it's hard to explain how stupid and untrue it is... because the big bang is not at all related to what was inside the space, but only a spread of time-space... and to tell all of us that there is no chance that stars and star clusters will form... even though we know (we don't guess, We don't assume, we know from observations) exactly how these processes happen... and we know that they don't have a zero chance but just the opposite... they must happen...
Want to know why...? I have a suggestion for you... go to the Azrieli tower, climb to the last floor... and jump... oh, you don't want to?... why not?... because of gravity...?
Ok... so this is the answer to your dumb question "Why would gas particles want to stick together and form something compressed if the universe is expanding?"... but obviously instead of learning... it's much easier to decide what answer best suits your agenda... no matter how dumb it is... no No matter how wrong and unsupported by the evidence it is... no matter how many other explanations *are* supported by the evidence...
Show was supposed to be seen
Miracles
You have a fundamental mistake.
The matter of "the beginning of life" has no practical importance...
It is more important to know how complex life was created, when it had already begun...
Out of the box
You said before that all scientific discoveries are thanks to help from heaven only and now you say that you do not underestimate the value of laboratory work? That's exactly what you did.
The fact that everyone has a worldview does not mean that they are all of the same quality, or related to reality to the same extent. Just because you say that doesn't make our worldviews equivalent.
When your worldview is based on what you want to be true instead of what you can discern to be true then your worldview is flawed and harms your ability to make decisions and conduct yourself in the world effectively, and it doesn't matter at all how much you want to believe and tell yourself that this is not the case.
Your ignorance in the field of science is enormous and instead of trying to correct it you repeat wrong things to people over and over again. It will not help. Even if you believe that what you say is true does not make it true. If you were just a little less ignorant and a little more willing to learn, you would quickly find out that all the things you described as concepts that exist in the world of science are actually not such at all. In fact, what you described showed like the perception of people who do not understand at all what science says about these areas, they heard these things in some lecture by someone who built one big straw man in order to present his theistic worldview as correct and now think that this lie is the truth.
Now I understand that you are not here to learn anything, but if your intention or all you are able to do is write completely false nonsense here with minimal basis, then do both us and yourself a favor and just stop commenting on this site.
Your scientific ignorance does not present you in a good light here, and insisting on ignoring it does not improve the situation.
outside the box
It doesn't matter how much nonsense you say - it's still nonsense. I suggest you stop living lies. I will not respond to any nonsense you said, because I have no doubt that either you have no idea what I'm talking about, or you have no desire to understand, or you have no ability to understand.
I will say only three things.
The first is that science is not "desperate" to search for the mechanism of the beginning of life on Earth. The thing is, we are finding more and more organic molecules that originate from outside the earth. Then more options will open up for the beginning of life, and this bothers you a lot... Get over it.
The second is that bacteria that were in the experiment on the shuttle "Columbia" survived the return to Earth. So this story of yours also fell through.
The third is that your understanding of probability, logic, philosophy, physics, and any other subject you talked about is still embarrassingly low.
Isn't it time you started listening???
For Eitan and Nisim
Indeed the probability is 1. It is a fact that there is a person and not one, but billions.. that is, male and female, the products are billions. And the reason for this is after man was created.. that can be said by any intelligent person.. but how was he created.. the world has one creator who created man. and everything in the universe..and with the scientific theories. that vary from one science to another... there are many components that have come together for various reasons. The so-called jokes of nature.. no scientist in the world has any explanation as to where the root of these laws is.. and they will always invent a new law in nature to justify the previous law.. but where did the laws appear from? The argument will be that they have always existed. There are no endings. unlimited Goddesses at their best and a little more sophisticated. Find me the root of the laws of nature please. For me, the root is in the same Creator.. there is no end above nature.
A creator that science has no grip on... because he is above scientific theories. The urinals are new to the visitors..once upon a time they thought that life was created on Earth..this time when they found out there was a problem they came up with a new idea it came from the meteors...and whoops we have a solution..and how did life originate on the meteorites??? The answer is clear when the sun... we haven't solved that yet.. but don't worry it will come too.. in the meantime we have a theory.. which explains how there are conditions for life there... and because of this a new coincidence was created.. they pierced the atmosphere.. with the tremendous friction of penetrating the sphere The land.. and they passed in 'peace'... and then in a tremendous collision on the surface of the sphere.. similar to several atomic bombs.. and they survived that too.. and of course then they managed to exist... and from the blood the probabilistic path to the formation of a person is very short.. and that there is a person... here is proof Genius.. that the probability that by chance a person will be created is 1.. wow.. what genius... oh we have proof. After all, they found a sign that there might be something life-like on one comet. that never hurt the earth. But we believe.. yes we believe that there are billions of them.. and they certainly hit the earth. Because we believe that it was so.. because there is no other explanation.. After all, believing that there is a creator is not a suitable explanation.. but believing in a process with zero probability for the formation of a person through accidental processes.. and I emphasize accidental.. there are almost no endings of such processes.. that is what you should believe . After all, it is a fact that there is man in the world.. but a creator for man.. this is an absurd belief.. our faith is stronger... after all, we invented it.. it is a fact that we have theories.. although there are some in them. There is imperfection here.. but we believe.. and again we will return to the word believe. We also find answers to the shortcomings of our theories.. But such a reality of a creator is a stupid belief.. The belief of science is stronger and what proves this is the reality of a person.. who was created completely by chance.. and who logically invented the Internet.. and language and writing.. and logically passes messages between one and the other. And if it doesn't make sense, then oh my, it's not natural for a person who was created by chance to write random and nonsensical things
Maya
I didn't know God was controversial? 🙂
Killers also have a culture, they pass hunting forms from generation to generation. Both Peugeot and hunting form are memes, and I'm not convinced it's unique to humans. What is unique, in my opinion, is grammar, and that is what allows us to talk about the things you described. Steven Pinker (which you should read) says that grammar is a sense (he pretty much continues the path of Noam Chomsky).
In any case, your guess is at least as good as mine... I think there will be forms "similar" to what exists today, but there won't be any species, or type that we know of. You say that we won't even know any family, series, department and maybe even an act that we know.
When we discover life on another planet, we will know 🙂
Miracles,
Have you read Yuval Noah Harari's book "Summary of the History of Mankind"? It made a lot of noise some time ago (I read it before the noise...) In any case, a highly recommended book, but one of the things I liked most about it was the way in which it distinguished man from other living creatures. It's similar to what you say but I think it's more accurate. He argued that the difference is our ability to perceive intangible objects. Even apes (and other creatures) are able to communicate with each other and convey basic ideas to each other such as: "There is a river there" or "Look at this tree". The uniqueness of man is his ability to convey ideas that have no "base in reality". That is, not something that can be seen, heard or felt like a tree, but something completely abstract. like god And really, the ability of people to believe together that some such concept exists unites them in a common goal. If we take a slightly less controversial topic than God, he gives a beautiful example to the Peugeot company. What makes a company something? is it the cars No, because if we destroy all the cars the company will still exist and will be able to produce new cars. Is it the factories? No, because even if we burn them all, the company will still exist. Is it the people? No. Even if everyone is fired, it will be possible to simply hire new ones. But so what? If one day some court decides that there is no more Peugeot company for some reason, even if all the cars, factories and people are still there, suddenly there will be no Peugeot company because the existence of the company depends on the ability of the people to believe that the company exists and this ability disappears as soon as some judge signs On what order do people now believe in him. In short, the capacity for shared belief which in turn derives from the ability to communicate abstract concepts is what creates our social structure that no other animal is capable of.
But in our case, I don't know how much capacity we have to think about it. How much ability do we have to imagine things we've never seen and solutions we've never witnessed? What you say makes sense - it is likely that there will be some kind of feedback, for example, to light and sound which are things that exist in the world independently of life. But, first of all, the fact that it is probable does not mean that it will necessarily happen and secondly, this feedback can look completely different from how it looks now.
By the way, multicellular organisms, for example, evolved more than once in evolution, but don't forget that their basic unit was a very specific cell. This basic unit can change and it can also change the advantages that a multicellular organism has (not that I understand how, but my lack of understanding how I depend on my limited imagination and nothing else). The same goes for forms of reproduction. In short, I do think that the animal world could look very, very different if we were to start all over now, but your guess is as good as mine...
Maya
A very interesting question. I think the species will be different from the species we know, but there will be things in common. Species will evolve to fill ecological niches. So, there will be those who will feed on minerals, we will call them plants, and there will be the "animals" who will eat the plants - we will probably get a complete food chain. There will of course be unicellular, and I assume also multicellular - because it has many advantages. There will be unisexual reproduction, and possibly bisexual, again because it has many advantages. I assume that animals will develop a bend system, with a "front" mouth. Senses will develop, such as sight, hearing, taste, smell, balance, magnetic field and so on.
It is likely that there will be a lot of bilateral symmetry, and as a result there will be duplication of "units", as in insects and after that in vertebrates.
You can go on and on - and this is really a well-known method of thinking about life forms on other planets.
Of course - a very fascinating question is the development of something like the human form. To think about this, you need to understand that there is a single thing that distinguishes us from apes - a language with grammar. I think it will develop at some point - but I fear that if it develops more than once, one species will eliminate the other. The reason I think so is because the niche of "intelligent life" has very little room.
Of course your question warrants a doctorate :).
Miracles
An interesting example, but is it true? I've asked this question before, do you think if we go back in time and press play again we'll get the exact same result? It is clear that the solutions obtained are all local minima, not necessarily global minima. Can't a small shift result in finding a completely different solution? Does the answer to the question depend on how much real stochasticity we have in this system we call the world?
outside the box
As Eitan said - the probability of the formation of man on earth is one.
You, and the rest of the idolaters, need to understand two things, which have already been told to you several times, and you, in your stupidity, repeat the mistake again and again.
The first is that it is impossible to talk about the probability of a complex event without knowing the probability of each part of the event.
The second is that evolution is not random. I will give an example from another end, a field that at least Rafael understands. Let's say I have a list of numbers that I want to sort. One of the simplest ways to do this is to randomly choose one of the numbers, and now divide the rest of the numbers into two lists - those smaller than the number we chose, and those larger than it. Now - we know the location of the number we chose. Now, do the same with the two lists we received.
We choose randomly - but we always end up with the same result 🙂
Now - can we not give this idiotic argument anymore?
And regarding Prof. Nachmani's article:
This is no longer a question.
Just today on an interesting website called "Hidan" a news was published with the following title "Surprise in the findings of the comet lander Philae: complex organic substances"
Also, please learn the difference between a question, a hypothesis, a theory, a statement of fact, and a belief.
please
There is a person on earth, hence the probability is 1
To firm
To save us time... there is a very interesting scientific website. In the name of science. It has an article by Professor Moshe Nachmani
"Did pre-living molecules form in the atmospheres of distant planets?"
To Eitan I will. To save you went to such a long number.. and here I found a website that you may know called Hidaan... an article by Professor Moshe Nachmani.. called
"Did pre-living molecules form in the atmospheres of distant planets?"
Thank you firmly
Since I lack any basic knowledge of scientific material, Anna, write me the probability of the formation of man on earth.. and write it logically.. I will ask you to go to the letter and in the number.. because you surely know. better than me.
Walking death and Ethan
First, each of us has a worldview. I am not underestimating the value of the laboratory work, peace be upon you..and sometimes I may even marvel at the discoveries even more than others and I am happy about that..
It is true that my worldview begins from the foundation of the foundations in Judaism... and this is the reality of a creator... omnipotence without limits... that's why they are firm when you ask where the limit is. So, as strange as it may sound to you at first, there is no limit to the private supervision of the Creator.. and this is by the very fact that it is limitless.. A very clumsy example of the matter, I will ask you whether the limit of the universe amounts to the number of stars in the universe or whether the space to which the stars can spread is unlimited. After all, science itself does not have a clear opinion. And this is only about a material reality that we are able to recognize.. Another existing example is the Viz device that shows us at any given moment where we are. And even more than that, he also outlines the way for us. It is clear to me that an infinite Creator is present at every given moment in every situation of our lives and of every particle in creation in the entire universe. and a road map. both for the scientists and for the seller in the market and for the frog in the egg.. and for the clouds and the planets.. and all this according to the situation we are in.. It is true that in the world view I am in there is no limit.. this is a view that is not limited in a box it also allows you to look at the angle of The scientist and the wonder of discovery. And in the enormous capacity that it will help all humanity.. and maybe even make our beautiful world greener.. and at the same time I see that there is a hand that directs the process to a miraculous state. A more beautiful futuristic state. Beyond the limitations of the human mind outside the box
Box
None of what you described in such a childish way happened and no scientist would claim that.
If you are wasting your time and our time on a scientific site, please study at least one scientific field so that you can describe it correctly. None of what you described happened as you described it.
If you refuse to study science, try studying statistics (even high school). Your understanding of the term "chance" is wrong.
At least learn syntax. It is very difficult to understand what you are trying to convey. Paragraphing and proper syntactic structure will help you convey your beliefs.
A. Indeed, she definitely won this lottery from above...
B. Regarding statistics. Let's check... in a very general way due to the shortness of the canvas..
According to the scientific theory, there was a big bang, a cloud of cosmic gas that spread with enormous speed from a central point to 360 degrees. Like the inflating balloon on which there are points moving away from each other.. Question A? If they move away, how do they group together to be from a gaseous cluster to a solid substance.. b. What are the chances of that happening? Of course, all of this happens by accident without any planning or intention.. The next step is the gas that for some reason becomes solid in its movement in all directions in an increasingly accelerated manner.. Somehow it manages to solidify more when more particles connect to each other... despite the fact that they are moving away from each other.. c .. What are the chances? Let's move on and let's assume that all this really happened and not just once out of billions of times. d.. what are the chances? Next, a star is formed, some of the material in which is solid, some is liquid, some is jazz... What are the chances? Don't forget that all of this is created by chance, long-term processes over time change the geographical structure, climate, etc. on the face of this planet by chance... and not only on its face, but on the face of billions of stars in the universe in different shades... and all this when these stars are moving away from each other at an accelerated rate More and more... and then by chance the first cell is formed. What are the chances? Even the scientists have a problem from where life originated on Earth.. to solve the problem we were not sent by steroids and meteorites that fell and were attracted to Earth.. and here you have an interesting solution.. how did life originate on meteorites or on other stars.. obviously there is no answer.. But with time we will surely find a solution..again what are the chances? The next step is not just one cell was created, but several of them in all kinds of places on earth... all this is still by chance... for some reason they discover that there is such a law in nature, a law that we don't know where nature invented it from.. this law is called the necessity of existence.. i.e. every creature For some reason you want to exist and continue to exist and the strong is the root.. a law created by chance.. don't forget.. what are the chances? Well, in order for the first cell to exist, it replicates itself.. another accidental situation that is not understood from where it appeared... by chance of course.. then a cell connects to a cell and what do we have an amoeba.. what are the chances.. in short miraculous coincidences mutations accidental changes in nature continue on from manufacturers Animals are extremely complex.. until nature in the most accidental way invented a strange thing... it's called.. logic.. and with this logic man uses.. then I write to crush in the note box.. it's delusional it doesn't make sense.. so the logical question I ask is Are all these European cases that I talked about whose probability tends to absolute zero.. can invent a reality of logic... unless there is a logic that created everything that exists in the first place.. and that is why a logical result is so important to us.. or is everything I have written up to a total Everything is a combination. Cases...
Box, your understanding of the relationship between statistics and divine intervention is not entirely clear to me.
You conclude that the scientist who researches new substances and discovers a new substance is divine intervention because of the low probability of discovery in your eyes? Where in your eyes is the statistical limit for divine intervention?
I parked in red and white and discovered that I happily did not receive a report despite the high probability that an inspector would pass (Tel Aviv...). Divine intervention?
I got a free sample at Superpharm of toothpaste despite the high chance that the samples will run out before I get to the checkout. Divine intervention?
Where is the line in your eyes?
And finally, why do you call yourself outside the box? You seem to have no ability to look outside the box or even realize you are in one. Do you think that seeing divine intervention in any action that you do not understand or want to understand indicates creativity or critical thinking ability?
Out of the box
Do you have any idea what working in a lab looks like? Do you know how many different experiments are happening every moment in different laboratories around the world?
Sometimes scientists come across side effects in the course of their work that are not what their research focuses on. It is simply an outgrowth of the nature of the work. Sometimes, when this happens, scientists will decide that such a phenomenon interests them enough to study it and sometimes not. Here is a case where the scientist decided that it did interest her and it ultimately led to something that reached publication. There are no shortage of examples of identical cases that have not reached this point. The difference is that you won't hear about them because you don't know or are from this world.
All you've done here is take a published statistical case that happens much more often than you're aware of and attached a definition to it whose only connection to it is your desire for there to be a connection between the things.
In the same way, one can look at cases where laboratory experiments do not succeed for scientists and say that they would have succeeded if it were not for the failure of the sky, and you wouldn't claim that this is what happens all the time, would you?
When you attach a tag of "with the help of heaven" to it, you are at best imposing your worldview on something unrelated to it and at worst lying to yourself or to those who read your words, either to strengthen your own worldview or to recruit more people to it.
Do the first one as you like, I'm not coming in to tell you what to do inside your head. With the second one it is better that you stop because it is a deviant activity and behavior.
Outside the box you talk nonsense, even to a person who wins the lottery when the chance of that is one in several millions it seems like help from above. Study some statistics and maybe you will understand.
Shmulik what do you mean?
There are no three points
Walking death
I don't know... according to the article it is possible to lean here and there.. we will see in any case the appearance of the lump on the side of the glass jar.. resulted from an experiment of different materials... but from what follows it is clear that it was not expected or planned... so much so that they did not know anything about this lump And they had to check what it is and what it was made of, etc. Based on this I base it on a coincidence... but as a believing Jew... it is clear to me that this is not a coincidence but assistance beyond the ability of the scientist... and this seems to me to be part of the goal of doing good to people... and it appeared just in time The appropriate and desirable... the scientist could have continued to try perhaps tens and hundreds of times more and not reach the result... and even after reaching the result it might not have occurred to him to test the strange phenomenon... and even after testing the phenomenon he might not have found the material basis that allows repeating the result... so in my view there is Dashmia faction
Nissim, you are right... thanks for the comment... and sorry..
Out of the box
How do you think this stuff got into the bottle?
Out of the box
Enough with these "hints". This is not appropriate for a scientific site.
to the zombie (the walking dead)
Maybe I'm delusional... but from the introduction in the article it can be understood that this was initially done by coincidence... it's possible that the conclusion is delusional... I copied the introduction... by the way. It is true that many advances in science were made by experimenting and wondering.. and even here it is likely that the substance was created in a laboratory bottle... but according to the introduction... it was created by a combination of unforeseen circumstances... i.e. let's try and see what came out... and oops is the experiment after many experiments the whole world disappears. A material suitable for our purpose was discovered... but whoops. There is... I refer to this hops as a coincidence... the outcome of which is not expected... not planned in advance... and here is the introduction written in the article..." When the research chemist Janet Garcia found a lump of white substance the size of a candy in one of the vials she had used some time before, she did not imagine what did she create The substance stuck firmly to the glass and she had to smash the bottle with a hammer to get the lump out. But when she hit the material itself with a hammer it refused to crack. "When I realized how strong it was, I knew I had to understand what it was made of," says Garcia.
Out of the box
You tell me that a research chemist who works at a research institute discovered/created new substances and ask if it might not be by chance? You are right, it is indeed not a coincidence. It's not that surprising either. Well this is a bit surprising, after all people doing their job is not something you come across every day.
But you have to have a very distorted world view to think what you really think when you wrote your comment.
Another excellent and good discovery for humanity and surprising in the world of science that happened by chance... wonderful. To what extent originality in the world leads a person to sublime matters...or is it not a coincidence?