02-07-2022, 06:45 AM
Hi busker-
I certainly appreciate your clarification, and I’m quite willing to be shown to be mistaken. That said, an accepted theory requires testing to back it up. String & M *theory* are brilliant examples of how mathematical constructs beg for a means of being tested. As you point out, it could be decades or centuries before those means are available. I maintain that an *un-tested theory* does not meet the criertia to be called an accepted theory, no matter how good the mathematical construct that predicts it. Hopefully, as much time, effort, and money have been poured into it, testing will bear it out.
I have little idea how the multiverse(s) can ever be detected/tested outside of the laws of physics. Perhaps that too is only a matter of time.
Will governments & taxpayers, or even billionaires, be convinced that technologies to conduct the experiments are worth the time and money. That alone could push the necessary discoveries well into the future.
Circling back to religion/science I am curious how some of the greatest minds in science- Newton, Bacon, Kepler, Maxwell, etc etc- reconciled their faith with their science. Probably the zeitgeist in which they worked. Beyond the many contradictions of the various religions, I contend that faith traditions have had, and still have, value within cultures. I disagree that some of the serious thought devoted to those traditions is wholly founded “on childish fables.” However, I whole heartedly agree that many of those traditions have been twisted from the beginning by people like Paul.
As I said before, I remain agnostic: I do not know if there is a God, and likewise, I do not know if there are multiple universes. It’s the not knowing that keeps me curious.
I certainly appreciate your clarification, and I’m quite willing to be shown to be mistaken. That said, an accepted theory requires testing to back it up. String & M *theory* are brilliant examples of how mathematical constructs beg for a means of being tested. As you point out, it could be decades or centuries before those means are available. I maintain that an *un-tested theory* does not meet the criertia to be called an accepted theory, no matter how good the mathematical construct that predicts it. Hopefully, as much time, effort, and money have been poured into it, testing will bear it out.
I have little idea how the multiverse(s) can ever be detected/tested outside of the laws of physics. Perhaps that too is only a matter of time.
Will governments & taxpayers, or even billionaires, be convinced that technologies to conduct the experiments are worth the time and money. That alone could push the necessary discoveries well into the future.
Circling back to religion/science I am curious how some of the greatest minds in science- Newton, Bacon, Kepler, Maxwell, etc etc- reconciled their faith with their science. Probably the zeitgeist in which they worked. Beyond the many contradictions of the various religions, I contend that faith traditions have had, and still have, value within cultures. I disagree that some of the serious thought devoted to those traditions is wholly founded “on childish fables.” However, I whole heartedly agree that many of those traditions have been twisted from the beginning by people like Paul.
As I said before, I remain agnostic: I do not know if there is a God, and likewise, I do not know if there are multiple universes. It’s the not knowing that keeps me curious.