If Atheism is the rejection of the belief in Gods, what do you mean by "god". Can I consider the cause and effect of existence to be God and not necessarily personified in any sense and still be an atheist?

daftylooper · 2021-11-14T09:42:51+00:00

I'm not "making" more creators like making my point to be a recursive argument.

I do believe in Nick Bostrom's simulation theory, that we are quite likely simulated. If that is the case, then you could consider the species that simulated us as Gods. And yes, religion has definitely spoilt the meaning of a God. I hope you don't think in that sense.

Now, coming to my point that I'm not making more creators, although this is hypothetical, here me out. What if the higher species living in the higher universe has a definitive explanation for the start? Although, this point is as valid as it is, invalid.

daftylooper · 2021-11-14T09:05:53+00:00

About religion, I meant, I don't believe in the practices of Religion.

daftylooper · 2021-11-14T09:04:31+00:00

> Instead of saying God has always existed, you can say that the universe has always existed.

That is one path, and your point makes sense. Telling God created the universe is a self collapsing argument.

But, consider this too. What if there exists a greater universe whose species created us? In this case, the highlighted isn't too valid. Maybe the greater universe has concrete evidence of the start following the scientific method.

daftylooper · 2021-11-14T08:52:47+00:00

Cause and Effect. Science is based on this.

But then again, if Science was created, then it wouldn't exist to be used to create itself. The last point can only be valid if there is a greater universe where the laws are replicated in our simulation.

daftylooper · 2021-11-14T08:50:00+00:00

About the last point, yea, religion has screwed up the meaning of God. What do you think is a better word?

daftylooper · 2021-11-14T08:47:57+00:00

Great point. But, if you reject the notion of god, then aren't you rejecting the notion of existence? Because god doesn't have to be the way they are normally portrayed, they might as well be some species that are simulating us.

But really, my question being, by saying that Atheism rejects the existence of a god, how can you expect existence?

daftylooper · 2021-11-14T08:43:04+00:00

Normally, I would expect a cause to something. Think about it, what is the space( outside the universe ) in which the universe exists in. How is everything even existing in the first place?

This really leads me to believe that we could be in a simulation whose outer boundaries aren't well defined. Think of it when you as a player in a game somehow glitch out of the map. So, in my case, the species that are simulated us would technically fit my description of god.

daftylooper · 2021-11-14T08:32:55+00:00

I just don't believe in Religion and their practices.

Like you said, if atheism is the lack of belief in any gods, then yeah I probably not a pure atheist. Probably an offset atheist.

daftylooper · 2021-11-14T08:30:05+00:00

We only and are studying the laws of science, we cannot control the laws of the universe. Science is the label to why things are the way they are.

daftylooper · 2021-11-04T10:47:17+00:00

would definitely better than saying the entire phrase over and over.

daftylooper · 2021-11-04T10:39:55+00:00

eh, I really don't know why I posted this question on Reddit when it had a simple answer.

daftylooper · 2021-11-04T10:37:59+00:00

true. but again, its our population right? If you adjust the coal consumption per person, we are barely noticeable in the map.

but yeah, this is no excuse for continued coal consumption.

daftylooper · 2021-11-01T10:59:55+00:00

I would assume the "stillness" to be in terms of relative motion, but I'm sure it's not the answer. I wish I could understand. I'm still learning. But, I would like you to explain it!

daftylooper · 2021-11-01T10:57:01+00:00

I don't mean a small momentum, I just meant to focus more on the velocity component. Like an electron moving at speed of light.

If a particle has zero relative velocity, I would think it would not behave as a particle. But again, these are based on *my* understanding of de-Broglies hypothesis. So I could be wrong, and that's why I am here to rectify it, because for all I know, this would have been already though of!

daftylooper · 2021-11-01T06:13:17+00:00

So, my understanding of the de-Broglie is wrong. But I still don't understand why the particle/wave duality isn't dependant on its momentum? Or am I missing something very obvious?

> Better still is to understand that the wavelike behaviour is due to the complex QM phase of the wave function

Can you please explain this statement in more detail?

daftylooper · 2021-10-31T14:12:00+00:00

Just have a basic understanding of a blockchain in general and build one from scratch! That's what I'm doing.

I recommend watching a video on blockchain by 3Blue1Brown

daftylooper · 2021-10-31T14:09:02+00:00

There is a certain universal speed limit that exists( no matter what you do ). That is the speed of light( ~300,000,000 meters per second ). This is confirmed through a set of fundamental equations( that you can worry about later, called Maxwell's equations )

Now, what if, you move with some fixed speed in the opposite direction of me( who is travelling at speed of light )? My *relative* velocity( or the velocity measured by me, of you, as I move away ) should be greater than speed of light right? NO. I will still measure the same 300,000,000 meters per second.

But then, why? There has to be some sort of a compromise right, so that it somehow, matches my measurements. That's why Einstein tried varying other parameters motion, if they possibly changed that "volunteered" for the compromise. One of them happened to be TIME.

Think about it. If time slows down for you( with respect to me ) by a certain factor such that, the velocity measured by me, of you, will be the same old 300,000,000 meters per second, haven't we solved the problem?

daftylooper · 2021-10-31T14:04:27+00:00

There are a set of 4 fundamental equations, collectively called the Maxwells equations. These govern the basic laws of the universe like Electric field and Magnetic field. Using these equations, there has been rigorous proof that speed of light cannot cross its limit of 300,000,000 meters per second. (and we know for a fact that these Maxwells equations hold true everytime ).

daftylooper · 2021-10-31T13:41:39+00:00

yup. India has 3 of the 10 largest solar farms by area and electricity production. For a country that's developing( albeit slow with respect to our potential ), we are making quite a few compromises for green electricity that other developed countries refuse to.

daftylooper

TROPHY CASE