Stephen Hawking finally comes out: I'm an Atheist (1 Viewer)

[Rohn Jambo]

I know most of you hate Tim. He's a smart guy. He gets in your crawl. he's right most of the time. #realtalk

He gets in my what?

Stephen Hawking may be smart but he is a party animal at heart. He has been proven wrong more than once before. I think he hopes he will lose this bet too, in time.

Not a chance. There is no gamble. We understand reality. No bets to be hedged.

You understand reality? Really? What is untrue is part of the truth and what is true is also false.

 

[Jayrod]

I know most of you hate Tim. He's a smart guy. He gets in your crawl. he's right most of the time. #realtalk

He gets in my what?

Stephen Hawking may be smart but he is a party animal at heart. He has been proven wrong more than once before. I think he hopes he will lose this bet too, in time.

Not a chance. There is no gamble. We understand reality. No bets to be hedged.

You understand reality? Really? What is untrue is part of the truth and what is true is also false.

She sells sea shells by the sea shore.

 

[Patrick Bateman]

I know most of you hate Tim. He's a smart guy. He gets in your crawl. he's right most of the time. #realtalk

He gets in my what?

Stephen Hawking may be smart but he is a party animal at heart. He has been proven wrong more than once before. I think he hopes he will lose this bet too, in time.

Not a chance. There is no gamble. We understand reality. No bets to be hedged.

You understand reality? Really? What is untrue is part of the truth and what is true is also false.

She sells sea shells by the sea shore.

Ummmmm......No, sad attempt at alliteration. Next!

 

[jon_mx]

If you understood everything. You could predict the future with absolute certainty. However, the computing power to do such would be beyond the limits of possibility. It is reality, but it is far beyond our capability to even attempt to understand how to accomplish.

 

[Josie Maran]

If you understood everything. You could predict the future with absolute certainty. However, the computing power to do such would be beyond the limits of possibility. It is reality, but it is far beyond our capability to even attempt to understand how to accomplish.

No.

 

[jon_mx]

If you understood everything. You could predict the future with absolute certainty. However, the computing power to do such would be beyond the limits of possibility. It is reality, but it is far beyond our capability to even attempt to understand how to accomplish.

No.

Q. E. D.

 

[matuski]

If you understood everything. You could predict the future with absolute certainty. However, the computing power to do such would be beyond the limits of possibility. It is reality, but it is far beyond our capability to even attempt to understand how to accomplish.

What.

 

[joffer]

If you understood everything. You could predict the future with absolute certainty. However, the computing power to do such would be beyond the limits of possibility. It is reality, but it is far beyond our capability to even attempt to understand how to accomplish.

Thanks Deepak

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

If you understood everything. You could predict the future with absolute certainty.

Not if one of the things you understand is that the future is unpredictable because parts of it unfold with genuine randomness.

However, the computing power to do such would be beyond the limits of possibility.

Figuring out the (or at least one possible) future state of the universe from a given present state does not require impossible computing power. In fact, the universe itself makes such computations all the time.

 

[B-Deep]

God ‏@TheTweetOfGod
"Stephen Hawking: 'I'm An Atheist'." Yikes. Maybe he's right. I mean I thought I existed, but that guy's pretty smart.

 

[jon_mx]

If you understood everything. You could predict the future with absolute certainty.

Not if one of the things you understand is that the future is unpredictable because parts of unfold with genuine randomness.

However, the computing power to do such would be beyond the limits of possibility.

Figuring out the (or at least one possible) future state of the universe from a given present state does not require impossible computing power. In fact, the universe itself makes such computations all the time.

So we really are living in a matrix?

 

[B-Deep]

If you understood everything. You could predict the future with absolute certainty.

Not if one of the things you understand is that the future is unpredictable because parts of unfold with genuine randomness.

However, the computing power to do such would be beyond the limits of possibility.

Figuring out the (or at least one possible) future state of the universe from a given present state does not require impossible computing power. In fact, the universe itself makes such computations all the time.

So we really are living in a matrix?

i am not sure about you, but i am living in the material world

 

[B-Deep]

and i AM a material girl

 

[jon_mx]

If you understood everything. You could predict the future with absolute certainty.

Not if one of the things you understand is that the future is unpredictable because parts of it unfold with genuine randomness.

However, the computing power to do such would be beyond the limits of possibility.

Figuring out the (or at least one possible) future state of the universe from a given present state does not require impossible computing power. In fact, the universe itself makes such computations all the time.

Just because it is seemingly random does not make it unpredictable. After the big bang there was choas, but the organization which followed all followed the laws of physics and should be perfectly predictable.

 

[jon_mx]

and i AM a material girl

Do you have big cone-like objects attached to your breasts?

 

[B-Deep]

and i AM a material girl

Do you have big cone-like objects attached to your breasts?

there's certainly a chance that i may

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

If you understood everything. You could predict the future with absolute certainty.

Not if one of the things you understand is that the future is unpredictable because parts of it unfold with genuine randomness.

However, the computing power to do such would be beyond the limits of possibility.

Figuring out the (or at least one possible) future state of the universe from a given present state does not require impossible computing power. In fact, the universe itself makes such computations all the time.

So we really are living in a matrix?

We are living in a computer because the universe is a computer (in the sense that it computes stuff: gravity, for example, works according to an algorithm).

But there's no good way to know, so far as I know, whether we're living in the root directory of the largest computer in existence, or in one of its lower-level modules.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

If you understood everything. You could predict the future with absolute certainty.

Not if one of the things you understand is that the future is unpredictable because parts of it unfold with genuine randomness.

However, the computing power to do such would be beyond the limits of possibility.

Figuring out the (or at least one possible) future state of the universe from a given present state does not require impossible computing power. In fact, the universe itself makes such computations all the time.

Just because it is seemingly random does not make it unpredictable. After the big bang there was choas, but the organization which followed all followed the laws of physics and should be perfectly predictable.

I didn't say seemingly random. I said genuinely random.

Whether the universe is seemingly or genuinely random is an open question. But if parts of it are genuinely random, those parts are genuinely unpredictable.

 

[jon_mx]

If you understood everything. You could predict the future with absolute certainty.

Not if one of the things you understand is that the future is unpredictable because parts of it unfold with genuine randomness.

However, the computing power to do such would be beyond the limits of possibility.

Figuring out the (or at least one possible) future state of the universe from a given present state does not require impossible computing power. In fact, the universe itself makes such computations all the time.

Just because it is seemingly random does not make it unpredictable. After the big bang there was choas, but the organization which followed all followed the laws of physics and should be perfectly predictable.

I didn't say seemingly random. I said genuinely random.

Whether the universe is seemingly or genuinely random is an open question. But if parts of it are genuinely random, those parts are genuinely unpredictable.

Only in the currently reality of our understanding things which is limited by our ability to comprehend what reality really is.

 

[jon_mx]

and i AM a material girl

Do you have big cone-like objects attached to your breasts?

there's certainly a chance that i may

 

[CowboysFromHell]

If you understood everything. You could predict the future with absolute certainty.

Not if one of the things you understand is that the future is unpredictable because parts of it unfold with genuine randomness.

However, the computing power to do such would be beyond the limits of possibility.

Figuring out the (or at least one possible) future state of the universe from a given present state does not require impossible computing power. In fact, the universe itself makes such computations all the time.

Just because it is seemingly random does not make it unpredictable. After the big bang there was choas, but the organization which followed all followed the laws of physics and should be perfectly predictable.

Can you predict whether or not I'm going to post again in this thread in less than 5 minutes?

 

[jon_mx]

If you understood everything. You could predict the future with absolute certainty.

Not if one of the things you understand is that the future is unpredictable because parts of it unfold with genuine randomness.

However, the computing power to do such would be beyond the limits of possibility.

Figuring out the (or at least one possible) future state of the universe from a given present state does not require impossible computing power. In fact, the universe itself makes such computations all the time.

Just because it is seemingly random does not make it unpredictable. After the big bang there was choas, but the organization which followed all followed the laws of physics and should be perfectly predictable.

Can you predict whether or not I'm going to post again in this thread in less than 5 minutes?

According to Hawkins, it should be possible. I am uncertain on this issue.

 

[tonydead]

When did knowing everything turn into knowing everything that will be? I'd think that anyone that was able to know everything would only have the to be part to look forward to.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

When did knowing everything turn into knowing everything that will be?

Moreover, when did everything being within reach of the human mind turn into knowing everything?

There are lots of things within the reach of my mind that I don't know. I don't know whether Matt Prater has any pets, for example, but whatever the answer is, it's within the reach of my mind.

 

[B-Deep]

Prater has an impressive fish tank, and a marmot

 

[joffer]

Why are atheists always so angry?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/10/03/illinois-groups-billboard-targets-senator-****-durbin-for-his-a-grade-from-atheist-lobby/

I don't know

 

[CowboysFromHell]

Why are atheists always so angry?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/10/03/illinois-groups-billboard-targets-senator-****-durbin-for-his-a-grade-from-atheist-lobby/

I don't know

Exactly. From the article:

...can you imagine if the word “atheists” was replaced with one describing any other religious group? “Durbin worked with Jews…”? It’d be completely unacceptable.

 

[matuski]

Why are atheists always so angry?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/10/03/illinois-groups-billboard-targets-senator-****-durbin-for-his-a-grade-from-atheist-lobby/

I don't know

Exactly. From the article:

...can you imagine if the word “atheists” was replaced with one describing any other religious group? “Durbin worked with Jews…”? It’d be completely unacceptable.

Of course this is why the "atheist" label fails as some broad representation. Atheism isn't a unifying force for most... it isn't some common ground we find safety in numbers with.

ETA - construing that billboard article as "atheists" being angry tells me you haven't read it.. the billboard is someone else's angry toward atheism.

 

[joffer]

Why are atheists always so angry?http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/10/03/illinois-groups-billboard-targets-senator-****-durbin-for-his-a-grade-from-atheist-lobby/

I don't know

Exactly. From the article:

...can you imagine if the word “atheists” was replaced with one describing any other religious group? “Durbin worked with Jews…”? It’d be completely unacceptable.

Of course this is why the "atheist" label fails as some broad representation. Atheism isn't a unifying force for most... it isn't some common ground we find safety in numbers with.

ETA - construing that billboard article as "atheists" being angry tells me you haven't read it.. the billboard is someone else's angry toward atheism.

:whoosh: <-- you