Prejudice
"Are you prejudiced?" asks StapMyVitals. Have you been a victim of prejudice? Are you a columnist for a popular daily newspaper? Don't bang on about how you never judge people on first impressions - no-one will believe you.
( , Thu 1 Apr 2010, 12:53)
"Are you prejudiced?" asks StapMyVitals. Have you been a victim of prejudice? Are you a columnist for a popular daily newspaper? Don't bang on about how you never judge people on first impressions - no-one will believe you.
( , Thu 1 Apr 2010, 12:53)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread
Minor detail from a scientist
By definition, the laws of physics are rooted in this universe and as such before the universe existed (not that that statement makes any sense - there was no time before the universe) there were no physical laws to obey.
( , Tue 6 Apr 2010, 13:44, 2 replies)
By definition, the laws of physics are rooted in this universe and as such before the universe existed (not that that statement makes any sense - there was no time before the universe) there were no physical laws to obey.
( , Tue 6 Apr 2010, 13:44, 2 replies)
fair point
I'm a squishy scientist (biology/psychology) so physics really isn't my strong suit...
Related but not actually relevant:
Isn't our entire universe dependent on all the forces we know of being exactly how they are? ie if any one force was stronger/weaker then life probably wouldn't be here?
( , Tue 6 Apr 2010, 13:58, closed)
I'm a squishy scientist (biology/psychology) so physics really isn't my strong suit...
Related but not actually relevant:
Isn't our entire universe dependent on all the forces we know of being exactly how they are? ie if any one force was stronger/weaker then life probably wouldn't be here?
( , Tue 6 Apr 2010, 13:58, closed)
You could make the case that if the forces were different life wouldn't have arisen
It's a tautology, like Douglas Adams pointed out - whatever happens, happens. If you subscribe to the "many worlds" hypothesis, you might argue that there are billions of universes where the forces were slightly different, and they don't contain life.
( , Tue 6 Apr 2010, 14:01, closed)
It's a tautology, like Douglas Adams pointed out - whatever happens, happens. If you subscribe to the "many worlds" hypothesis, you might argue that there are billions of universes where the forces were slightly different, and they don't contain life.
( , Tue 6 Apr 2010, 14:01, closed)
Alternate Universes
Now we're getting into the lovely world of string theory with alternate/splitting dimensions. :)
( , Tue 6 Apr 2010, 18:26, closed)
Now we're getting into the lovely world of string theory with alternate/splitting dimensions. :)
( , Tue 6 Apr 2010, 18:26, closed)
Not necessarily
There is some evidence that the laws may be subtly different in distant reaches of space, and also that they aren't constant.
I heard a nice theory once that if the entire quantum state of the universe is able to tunnel from state to state (electrons can do it, on a much smaller scale) then the laws of physics will shift by immesurably small bits until they are in a ratio that would co-incidentally allow life to arise, at which point it would, and be surprised that it had done so.
( , Tue 6 Apr 2010, 23:16, closed)
There is some evidence that the laws may be subtly different in distant reaches of space, and also that they aren't constant.
I heard a nice theory once that if the entire quantum state of the universe is able to tunnel from state to state (electrons can do it, on a much smaller scale) then the laws of physics will shift by immesurably small bits until they are in a ratio that would co-incidentally allow life to arise, at which point it would, and be surprised that it had done so.
( , Tue 6 Apr 2010, 23:16, closed)
Surely they ARE the universe
rather than just being a part of them?
( , Tue 6 Apr 2010, 20:17, closed)
rather than just being a part of them?
( , Tue 6 Apr 2010, 20:17, closed)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread