Somethign that cannot be explained with science

[wacki]

Originally posted by: User1001
why humans like the golden ratio so much. Why the fibbonaci sequence is so prevalent in nature. Sure we can guess why. But science cannot explain them.

Fibonacci prevalence is the best subject I?ve seen yet as far as not being able to be explained by science. Everything else has clear and concise explanations. Good job User1001.

For brains: check out the Rat hippocampus replacement
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2843099.stm

For love:
Simple biochemistry .. ever heard of chocolate specifically Phenylethylamine

For Color:
All wavelengths and combinations of light

For why we are here:
That?s a little more complicated. Try researching the effects of how lightning creates amino acids. Then its simple Darwin?s finches phenomenon from then on. Not to mention the accuracy of DNA polymerase.

As for the tree/sound thing:
I prefer quote a lawyer I know "Never argue with idiots, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."

For Gravity:
I know there is an explanation, I just don't know it. If someone knows a link please post.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

As for the 'soul' thing: You could just as well tell him to assume God exists, and ask him where God would be. He could answer God would be at your house screwing your gf/wife/mother, and you could not prove him wrong as you started out with an assumption anyway. You can also say 'Assume that 1+1=3, explain why it is', and it would be equal nonsense.

What you can ask though is what was there before the Big Bang, why there is matter anyway, why there is a universe. Anything to do with energy can be explained, from love to black holes, but spiritual/theoretical things are a different matter.
You can also ask him to explain why 1+1=3, but he might just ignore you for saying something dumb if he doesn't have a sense of humor.

 

[SickBeast]

Science cannot explain the force/entity which caused the big bang.

It also can't explain the cause of the first cell of life which evolutionists believe evolved into humans.

The list goes on...there's the speed of light, gravity, the meaning of life, what happens when we die, etc etc

 

[f95toli]

*About the cause of Big Bang: Not yet, maybe in a few years but the answer will not give us "a cause" but maybe a reason.

*"Cause" of the first cell: Not a valid question, you are assuming there must be a cause without giving any supporting facts.

*The meaning of life and what happens when we die: The first question can not (by definition) have a scientific answer, the answer to the second question is as far as we know that the body cease to function and the chemical/electrical processes that gives us a conscience stop working, finally the body will start to decay.
If you want to involve religion in these questions then you are automaticaly leaving the realms of science.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: f95toli
*About the cause of Big Bang: Not yet, maybe in a few years but the answer will not give us "a cause" but maybe a reason.

*"Cause" of the first cell: Not a valid question, you are assuming there must be a cause without giving any supporting facts.

*The meaning of life and what happens when we die: The first question can not (by definition) have a scientific answer, the answer to the second question is as far as we know that the body cease to function and the chemical/electrical processes that gives us a conscience stop working, finally the body will start to decay.
If you want to involve religion in these questions then you are automaticaly leaving the realms of science.

OK...you didn't really properly rebut what I said tho. You used jargon and technicalities to make your case. To respond to your technical description of death, I would reply to say that science cannot explain what happens to the human soul and spirit when we die.

"Cause" of the first cell: what came first, the chicken or the egg? Can something suddenly materialize out of nothing? For that matter, what created matter? Science will never be able to explain these things as they are simply beyond human levels of comprehension. *personal bias and speculation included*

 

[rjain]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

OK...you didn't really properly rebut what I said tho. You used jargon and technicalities to make your case. To respond to your technical description of death, I would reply to say that science cannot explain what happens to the human soul and spirit when we die.

What is this "soul" "jargon" you are using? I'm not familiar with such an observable phenomenon.

"Cause" of the first cell: what came first, the chicken or the egg? Can something suddenly materialize out of nothing? For that matter, what created matter? Science will never be able to explain these things as they are simply beyond human levels of comprehension. *personal bias and speculation included*

The egg came first. Something that wasn't a chicken laid it, and there were mutations in the DNA that made that new organism into a chicken. Yes, something can materialize out of nothing. That's what zero point energy is. Just because we don't know what created matter doesn't mean we will never know that. YOUR comprehension may be far below the levels required to understand these issues, but that don't assume that you're the smartest person ever. Don't assume that we're at the pinnacle of human achievement either, or that something smarter than a human can't exist. Time moves forward. Move with it. Science isn't a religion, it's a process for creating more and more comprehensive predictive models of the world around us.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: rjain

Originally posted by: SickBeast

OK...you didn't really properly rebut what I said tho. You used jargon and technicalities to make your case. To respond to your technical description of death, I would reply to say that science cannot explain what happens to the human soul and spirit when we die.

What is this "soul" "jargon" you are using? I'm not familiar with such an observable phenomenon.

**That's why science can't explain it.

"Cause" of the first cell: what came first, the chicken or the egg? Can something suddenly materialize out of nothing? For that matter, what created matter? Science will never be able to explain these things as they are simply beyond human levels of comprehension. *personal bias and speculation included*

The egg came first. Something that wasn't a chicken laid it, and there were mutations in the DNA that made that new organism into a chicken.

**Are you somehow stating that somebody has personally seen one species somehow mutate into a totally seperate one? For that matter, how does a plant cell evolve into an animal cell?

Yes, something can materialize out of nothing. That's what zero point energy is.

**What made the zero-point energy then?

Just because we don't know what created matter doesn't mean we will never know that. YOUR comprehension may be far below the levels required to understand these issues, but that don't assume that you're the smartest person ever.

**I don't think I'm the smartest person ever. I'm far from it. Thanks for insulting my scientific knowledge and level of comprehention. It's my opinion that all men are created equal. This is getting pretty far off topic tho. I didn't know that this thread was meant for personal attacks.

Don't assume that we're at the pinnacle of human achievement either, or that something smarter than a human can't exist. Time moves forward. Move with it. Science isn't a religion, it's a process for creating more and more comprehensive predictive models of the world around us.

I just like to keep in mind that science is largely based on theory. What defines proof?

Many say that human ingenuity can and will conquer all obstacles. I thought that I was adding to this thread but it seems that it has somehow degenerated into a flame war. Eep.

 

[rjain]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: rjain

Originally posted by: SickBeast

OK...you didn't really properly rebut what I said tho. You used jargon and technicalities to make your case. To respond to your technical description of death, I would reply to say that science cannot explain what happens to the human soul and spirit when we die.

What is this "soul" "jargon" you are using? I'm not familiar with such an observable phenomenon.

**That's why science can't explain it.

"Cause" of the first cell: what came first, the chicken or the egg? Can something suddenly materialize out of nothing? For that matter, what created matter? Science will never be able to explain these things as they are simply beyond human levels of comprehension. *personal bias and speculation included*

The egg came first. Something that wasn't a chicken laid it, and there were mutations in the DNA that made that new organism into a chicken.

**Are you somehow stating that somebody has personally seen one species somehow mutate into a totally seperate one? For that matter, how does a plant cell evolve into an animal cell?

Yes. Evolution has occurred before our very eyes. According to what we know now, plants never evolved into animals. They diverged far earlier.

Yes, something can materialize out of nothing. That's what zero point energy is.

**What made the zero-point energy then?

We haven't studied it enough to understand it at that level. But that says nothing about what science can and cannot explain. It says something about what we can and cannot explain yet.

Just because we don't know what created matter doesn't mean we will never know that. YOUR comprehension may be far below the levels required to understand these issues, but that don't assume that you're the smartest person ever.

**I don't think I'm the smartest person ever. I'm far from it. Thanks for insulting my scientific knowledge and level of comprehention. It's my opinion that all men are created equal. This is getting pretty far off topic tho. I didn't know that this thread was meant for personal attacks.

Then don't base your assumptions on what can possibly be known on what you personally understand right now. All men may be created equal, but that has nothing to do with what we choose to do and learn. Know your strengths and weaknesses, and help everyone else improve their weaknesses by using your strengths.

Don't assume that we're at the pinnacle of human achievement either, or that something smarter than a human can't exist. Time moves forward. Move with it. Science isn't a religion, it's a process for creating more and more comprehensive predictive models of the world around us.

I just like to keep in mind that science is largely based on theory. What defines proof?

Many say that human ingenuity can and will conquer all obstacles. I thought that I was adding to this thread but it seems that it has somehow degenerated into a flame war. Eep.

Proof only exists in mathematics, where we have a closed system of facts (axioms). Science isn't based on theory, it's a system for using theories. You might say that many theories are based on science, instead. New observations can result in new theories if the existing theories incorrectly predict the observations. This isn't a flame war, I'm just trying to get you to put science in the perspective that it's meant to be seen, not as some sort of tome of dogma that is fixed for all eternity. Maybe religion is really necessary for the common person...

 

[SickBeast]

When did evolution occur before our very eyes? Are you talking about viruses that mutate, or bacteria that becomes resistant to certain chemicals? From what I have read, the closest we have seen has been the evolution from wolves into the different breeds of dogs.

I don't view science as a "tome of dogma". I fully embrace science and technology and all that it has brought to our society, good and bad.

Why are you questioning the importance of religion, and stating that it is merely for the "common person"? Scientists are no more intelligent or important than doctors, lawyers, architects, engineers, and public servants.

 

[rjain]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
When did evolution occur before our very eyes? Are you talking about viruses that mutate, or bacteria that becomes resistant to certain chemicals? From what I have read, the closest we have seen has been the evolution from wolves into the different breeds of dogs.

Those are some situations, yes

I don't view science as a "tome of dogma". I fully embrace science and technology and all that it has brought to our society, good and bad.

I'm not asking you to embrace any theories. I'm asking you to understand how the scientific process works. Arbitrarily embracing theories is contrary to that.

Why are you questioning the importance of religion, and stating that it is merely for the "common person"?

I never said that, but yeah, that could be true. At least personally, I don't need to theorize about things that are, by definition, impossible to observe.

Scientists are no more intelligent or important than doctors, lawyers, architects, engineers, and public servants.

I'm not asking you to make any comparison of anyone's intelligence to anyone else's, not even ones involving overlapping sets...

 

[SickBeast]

I never said that, but yeah, that could be true. At least personally, I don't need to theorize about things that are, by definition, impossible to observe.

It must be nice to live a life that is that cut-and-dry. Besides, wasn't the entire point of this thread to discuss things that science is unable to explain? If my memory serves me correctly, you just jumped into the middle of a debate that I was having with someone else just so that you could attack my position and impose your opinion on me. Get bent.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

I just like to keep in mind that science is largely based on theory. What defines proof?

Many say that human ingenuity can and will conquer all obstacles. I thought that I was adding to this thread but it seems that it has somehow degenerated into a flame war. Eep.

Why do you see someone asking for proof of the existance of a 'soul' as a flame war? A 'soul' is just a religious concept, human thoughts are a chemical/electrical process, just like with any other animal with a brain. Just like love is simply a chemical process to ensure the continuation of the species, telling you that you have to procreate.

 

[Mingon]

the closest we have seen has been the evolution from wolves into the different breeds of dogs.

Their is the albeit debated case of the moths in england during the industrial age, due to the soot from the factories causing their natural cover (the silver birch) to be turned black. The animals it is observed evolved itself to be of a different colour i.e black to stop it being eaten by birds, if this is evolution or not depends on your acceptance of natural selection IMOH.

What is this "soul" "jargon" you are using? I'm not familiar with such an observable phenomenon.

I prefer personality 😀

what came first, the chicken or the egg?

Another silly question, the chicken only became a chicken when we named it, before then it was an unamed dinner waiting to happen 🙂

A 'soul' is just a religious concept, human thoughts are a chemical/electrical process, just like with any other animal with a brain. Just like love is simply a chemical process to ensure the continuation of the species, telling you that you have to procreate

The soul is not just a religous concept, the film final fantasy introduces the Gaia theory which is a sceintific based theory (with spiritual conatations) and we cant disount these just because we dont understand them 😀

 

[Medicated858]

Originally posted by: AEB

Originally posted by: FrustratedUser

Originally posted by: alankool
Alright so my teacher told the class that if we could find something cannot be explained with science we get a 100 on the first major test. 😀 but the thing is I cant think of much. The best one I can think of is How god works. so my question is. Is there actually anything that exists that science cannot explain or is my teachers offer impossible to receive 🙁

Easy!
Women.

women HAhAHH


Why it took 2 NUKES before the japs realized they were done for.

Why an ignorant person like you is still allowed to post messages on Anandtech's forums.

 

[dmcowen674]

Another good thread, except for the Nukes of course, WTG everyone.

 

[rjain]

Originally posted by: Mingon

The soul is not just a religous concept, the film final fantasy introduces the Gaia theory which is a sceintific based theory (with spiritual conatations) and we cant disount these just because we dont understand them 😀

I'm a big supporter of the Gaia theory (which was around LONG before the FF movie), and it doesn't have spiritual connotations any more than your own behavior must have spiritual connotations. We don't have to force religion into the discussion just because we don't feel like understanding something. Accept the fact that we don't understand it yet and either try to explain it or not. Anything that can be observed can be explained by science, you just have to have an open mind.

 

[Mingon]

We don't have to force religion into the discussion just because we don't feel like understanding something. Accept the fact that we don't understand it yet and either try to explain it or not. Anything that can be observed can be explained by science, you just have to have an open mind.

The point I am trying to make, is that although I have no religous beliefs, I cannot completely ignore peoples ideas with them. as you say yourself 'Accept the fact that we don't understand it yet and either try to explain it or not'.

Certain religous idea's do have some background which can be treated scientifically, the great floods for instance, they are mentioned in lots of religons, how you believe in them is dependant on your religous/scientific views.

 

[Epipheny]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Have science explain why you are here and what is your true purpose.

This is not a question that science cannot explain. Why are we here? Because we evolved into our current form and the conditions on the earth through our evolution were condusive to our flourishing. As to purpose, you are assuming some divine power, or intelligence behind the universe. This probably doesn't exist, and so cannot be explained.

On an interesting note, you can prove that God doesn't exist in his 'all powerful' form. If he did, you could say to him:

'Create a mountain so large that you cannot lift it'. Because he can do ANYTHING, he would have to be able to do it. But then he couldn't lift it and thus he is not all powerful.

Forgot what philosopher came up with that, but very good it is! (Yoda talk)

 

[Mingon]

'Create a mountain so large that you cannot lift it'. Because he can do ANYTHING, he would have to be able to do it. But then he couldn't lift it and thus he is not all powerful.

Dogmatic law, but as a mountain would have to be on a planet it would take a planet the size of the universe theoretically to hold your massively big mountain and as he created the universe he should be able to lift it, that is of course if he felt the need to prove himself *

* not my views on god, just the sort of argument you would hear

 

[rjain]

People can easily can build things that they can't lift. In fact, that's been going on regularly for the past 100 years. Of course, this whole discussion is pointless, because religion isn't about truth, it's about belief in things that can't be observed.

 

[SickBeast]

Why an ignorant person like you is still allowed to post messages on Anandtech's forums.

Ignorance is bliss, or so they say.

And as for the GAIA *THEORY*, how many people came up with the theory? What was their status in life? What did they think would happen if they were to move on to greener pastures?

Ahh...and the moth issue. I would imagine that all of those moths had the white and black genes in their genetic structure. I would also suggest that the black gene was recessive, which seems interesting because in humans the darker genes are usually dominant. So indeed, it could be argued that natural selection does take place.

However, I do not see any solid proof with regards us evolving from a goop like cell with a nucleus, a membrane, and some amino acids.

Interesting discussion. I'm still waiting for more people to insult my intelligence and refer to religion as something necessary for the "common people".

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: rjain
People can easily can build things that they can't lift. In fact, that's been going on regularly for the past 100 years. Of course, this whole discussion is pointless, because religion isn't about truth, it's about belief in things that can't be observed.

You're just so insightful, aren't you? People were building things that 1,000,000 people could not lift 5,000 years ago. Ooooh...look at me...I know something.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

Let's keep this clean, shall we?

If there was an all-powerful god then he/she/it would also have the power to remove all powers, thereby making the dilemma possible, but reducing god to a weak being. (Unless he puts a time limit on it, so he gets the powers back afterwards)
He/she/it could also make a virtual mountain and, it being virtual, would be impossible to lift.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1
Let's keep this clean, shall we?

My thoughts exactly when I joined this thread. By the way, everyone here can let me know if they can see, smell, touch, or hear their brain *no surgery allowed*.

OK...done posting here *rediculous disgruntled goat face*. The folks at my university are obviously not highly technical.

 

[Mingon]

By the way, everyone here can let me know if they can see, smell, touch, or hear their brain *no surgery allowed*.

Well sometimes I can touch my brain, but only with the help of a beautiful woman 😉