Philosophy and Humanities I think, therefore I argue.


Sponsors (please log in or register to remove this ad)
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #61 (permalink)  
Old 09-29-2006, 06:06 AM
Zythryn's Avatar
Creating
Platinum Subscription
Sponsor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,043
Zythryn is a splendid one to beholdZythryn is a splendid one to beholdZythryn is a splendid one to beholdZythryn is a splendid one to beholdZythryn is a splendid one to beholdZythryn is a splendid one to beholdZythryn is a splendid one to beholdZythryn is a splendid one to beholdZythryn is a splendid one to behold
Re: Universe's, Intelligent Design

Quote:
Originally Posted by FRIPRO
This manuscript's subject, UIDE, discusses these theories, at great lengths, and is Science not Theology.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FRIPRO
The theory of Intelligent design (Id) by enthusiast religious teachers is Theology and UIDE, unlike Intelligent design, is Science.
Fripro, what I fail to understand is why you insist UIDE is science?

Quote:
Originally Posted by FRIPRO
Does the Universe have consciousness, and is the Earth a living organism?
These are wonderful questions. If you wish to answer these philosophically have at it. If you wish to form a scientific hypothesis, you need to propose some physical traits that would allow you to measure/detect that consciousness/life.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FRIPRO
... I would also agree with InfiniteNow from HSF, with respect to UIDE. It may be beyond absolute proof, at our current level of understanding.
Absolute proof is not required for a scientific theory. Just a hypothesis created after making observations. Then tests created to disprove the hypothesis. If they fail to disprove the hypothesis the hypothesis becomes a theory.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FRIPRO
UIDE is a roadmap giving the reader considerable data to find his way...
I have seen no data that you have shared with us, only suppositions.
The closest I have seen is your suggestion of a particle you termed a 'wit'. Perhaps you could expand on this, what are the hypothetical properties of this 'wit' (other than its mass which you have mentioned. Is there a type of test to detect them directly? How do they intereact with other particles.

In conclusion, your UIDE sounds, reads and looks like a religious statement. If you do truly intend for it to be a scientific theory it needs to follow the basic facets the scientific method:
source: from Wikopedia

************************************************** ****
The scientific method involves the following basic facets:

Observation. A constant feature of scientific inquiry.

Description. Information must be reliable, i.e., replicable (repeatable) as well as valid (relevant to the inquiry).

Prediction. Information must be valid for observations past, present, and future of given phenomena, i.e., purported "one shot" phenomena do not give rise to the capability to predict, nor to the ability to repeat an experiment.

Control. Actively and fairly sampling the range of possible occurrences, whenever possible and proper, as opposed to the passive acceptance of opportunistic data, is the best way to control or counterbalance the risk of empirical bias.

Falsifiability, or the elimination of plausible alternatives. This is a gradual process that requires repeated experiments by multiple researchers who must be able to replicate results in order to corroborate them. This requirement, one of the most frequently contended, leads to the following: All hypotheses and theories are in principle subject to disproof. Thus, there is a point at which there might be a consensus about a particular hypothesis or theory, yet it must in principle remain tentative. As a body of knowledge grows and a particular hypothesis or theory repeatedly brings predictable results, confidence in the hypothesis or theory increases.

****************************
__________________
"Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents; it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children.

(Ancient Indian Proverb)"

1874 engraving of Mount Hood and the Columbia River by R. Henshel Wood
Reply With Quote
Sponsors
  #62 (permalink)  
Old 09-29-2006, 08:42 PM
Questioning
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 122
FRIPRO is infamous around these partsFRIPRO is infamous around these parts
Re: Universe's, Intelligent Design

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zythryn
Fripro, what I fail to understand is why you insist UIDE is science?



These are wonderful questions. If you wish to answer these philosophically have at it. If you wish to form a scientific hypothesis, you need to propose some physical traits that would allow you to measure/detect that consciousness/life.



Absolute proof is not required for a scientific theory. Just a hypothesis created after making observations. Then tests created to disprove the hypothesis. If they fail to disprove the hypothesis the hypothesis becomes a theory.



I have seen no data that you have shared with us, only suppositions.
The closest I have seen is your suggestion of a particle you termed a 'wit'. Perhaps you could expand on this, what are the hypothetical properties of this 'wit' (other than its mass which you have mentioned. Is there a type of test to detect them directly? How do they intereact with other particles.

In conclusion, your UIDE sounds, reads and looks like a religious statement. If you do truly intend for it to be a scientific theory it needs to follow the basic facets the scientific method:
source: from Wikopedia

************************************************** ****
The scientific method involves the following basic facets:

Observation. A constant feature of scientific inquiry.

Description. Information must be reliable, i.e., replicable (repeatable) as well as valid (relevant to the inquiry).

Prediction. Information must be valid for observations past, present, and future of given phenomena, i.e., purported "one shot" phenomena do not give rise to the capability to predict, nor to the ability to repeat an experiment.

Control. Actively and fairly sampling the range of possible occurrences, whenever possible and proper, as opposed to the passive acceptance of opportunistic data, is the best way to control or counterbalance the risk of empirical bias.

Falsifiability, or the elimination of plausible alternatives. This is a gradual process that requires repeated experiments by multiple researchers who must be able to replicate results in order to corroborate them. This requirement, one of the most frequently contended, leads to the following: All hypotheses and theories are in principle subject to disproof. Thus, there is a point at which there might be a consensus about a particular hypothesis or theory, yet it must in principle remain tentative. As a body of knowledge grows and a particular hypothesis or theory repeatedly brings predictable results, confidence in the hypothesis or theory increases.


http://www.fripro.com/AIDE.html
****************************
Please look AT: aqlso:http://www.fripro.com/Universe.html For the WIt particle proof click on Wit Particle.

Thank you for your interesting coments. I am positive that the UIDE theory is not Theology --it is science. I leave it to you if you study my Web and the UIDE manuscript Sincerely FRIPRO Tom
Reply With Quote
  #63 (permalink)  
Old 09-29-2006, 11:41 PM
Boerseun's Avatar
Astrocow
Hypography Staff Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hartbeespoort, South Africa
Posts: 4,542
Blog Entries: 3
Boerseun has a reputation beyond reputeBoerseun has a reputation beyond reputeBoerseun has a reputation beyond reputeBoerseun has a reputation beyond reputeBoerseun has a reputation beyond reputeBoerseun has a reputation beyond reputeBoerseun has a reputation beyond reputeBoerseun has a reputation beyond reputeBoerseun has a reputation beyond reputeBoerseun has a reputation beyond reputeBoerseun has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Universe's, Intelligent Design

Quote:
Originally Posted by FRIPRO
Please look AT: aqlso:http://www.fripro.com/Universe.html For the WIt particle proof click on Wit Particle.
With all due respect Tom, your website's a mess. II couldn't find the page explaining what a 'wit' particle is. I would appreciate it if you could elaborate on the 'wit' particle a little further. And also, if you could inform us of any credible sources like CERN actually observing something that might be called a 'wit' particle.
__________________
Hypography Forums Moderator

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII



Ruminating in zero G is overrated.
Reply With Quote
  #64 (permalink)  
Old 09-30-2006, 12:31 PM
Questioning
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 122
FRIPRO is infamous around these partsFRIPRO is infamous around these parts
Re: Universe's, Intelligent Design

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boerseun
With all due respect Tom, your website's a mess. II couldn't find the page explaining what a 'wit' particle is. I would appreciate it if you could elaborate on the 'wit' particle a little further. And also, if you could inform us of any credible sources like CERN actually observing something that might be called a 'wit' particle.

Sorry I did not realize the web site was so hard to handle so I will insert the WIT particle calculations here.

[DeBorlie mass wave theory 1924] converted, by Fairbairn, to show "Wit" particle Mass in gram seconds:
1. From Planck's light's photon (hµ)energy equation:***
E1 = hµ ** h = Planck's constant 6.62559x10-27erg sec
*µ = frequency in hertz of a mass wave
**********
2. From EINSTINE's mass energy (mc2 ) equation *
E2= mc2** c = (2.99792457x1010cm/sec)
****************** *c is the velocity of UV light*
m is the mass in grams

E1 = energy E2 = energy**Therefore:
E1 = E2
*hµ = mc 2
m = hµ/c 2
h and c 2* are both constants therefore can be replaced by constant k f
m=k f µ
k f = h /c 2
When µ is one hertz
*k f =* h /c 2
c being * the velocity of UV light* (In our section of the Universe)
* 6.62559x10-27erg-sec / (2.99792457x1010 cm/sec) 2 = *kf * =* 7. 371963x 10 -48 erg - sec / (cm/sec)2 *
Note (the units of (kf *can be simplified to g sec.)*


The Dimensional Analysis is:

Dimensional Analysis (simplifying unit conversion)*
__Therefore: m = kf µ
* m =kf* = 7.371963x 10- 48* g-sec

when ( µ) is at one hertz, mass is in grams
Fairbairn demonstrates equating Planck's formula (E=hµ)) and Einstein's formula (E=mc2) which contain equal energy E,and restates it as
(m = kf µ) .
kf =m/ µ

Fairbairn states his constant kf is his universal constant, of Newton's elusive Ether atmosphere of the Universe, and this constant is gram-seconds (calculated at kf = 7.371963x 10 - 48* g- sec) ; an may explain the "dark matter'' in space.* Measurements show that "this dark matter", must make up about 73+ percent of the universe, but which has yet to be seen.

Note: the accuracy of kf* depends on the correct measurements of the velocity of UV light and planck's constant. As these values change Fairbairn's constant kf also must be recalculated.
*(Present values are taken from the National Bureau of Standards, but should be checked for the latest measurements.

The question to Physics lovers, is: how do you detect a particle that is x 10- 48 grams at a frequency of one hertz, in a time period of one second? No wonder the dark matter can not be seen! Yet is everywhere until -- there is nothing.

Note: Fairbairn gives the ether particle mass a name "Wit": a "Wit" is 7.371963x 10-48* grams.* Websters dictionary definition for "Wit" is the limit of one's mental resources; also , at (one's) wits' end (Further translated to -- that which is the smallest mass particle one can imagine or measure)

I hope that these simple math calculations can answer your question on the WIT particle that makes up Newton's Ether atmosphere of the Universe. (FRIPRO) TOM

CERN is still under construction. Here is a a FERMI LAB VIDEO that helps explain particle/wave physics: http://vmsstreamer1.fnal.gov/VMS/Samples/Cerenkov.ram

Would like to hear from you, an any further points that you may have in mind at: my web site e mail is fripro@fripro.com Further photos are at http://www.fripro.com/Universe.html SINCERELY TOM (FRIPRO)
Reply With Quote
  #65 (permalink)  
Old 04-11-2008, 08:40 AM
Questioning
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 122
FRIPRO is infamous around these partsFRIPRO is infamous around these parts
Re: UNIVERSE'S, INTELLIGENT DESIGN by EVOLUTION (UIDE)©*

Quote:
Originally Posted by FRIPRO View Post
The original string in the "Theology forum" was canceled by the String administrator due to content not appicable to the string subject,. We were told to re-list under another string or subject, if still required!

As I believe the site string administraor had a good reason to shut down the string, due to out of hand content by some persons. I have relisted it in the SCIENCE forumn. The reason being I really want to hear from the scientific community reasonable comments. FRIPRO

Thank you for your consideration:FRIPRO
Infinate now is right, I am looking for real opinions, and there is very little time left to include you opinions on the subject,FRIPRO
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks
Sponsors



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Intelligent design pgrmdave Theology forum 640 07-18-2006
Universe's Intelligent Design by Evolution (UIDE)© FRIPRO Theology forum 157 05-02-2006
Intelligent Design Uncle Martin Philosophy and Humanities 14 03-04-2005
Intelligent design / creationism Stargazer Biology 206 02-25-2005

» Advertisement
» Latest Science News
Planets Align for the 4th of July
imageNews Flash: On 4th of July weekend, NASA forecasts lights in the sky.
Read » | 0 comments

Metals Shape Up with a Little Help from Friends
imageCornell researchers have developed a method to self-assemble metals into complex configurations with structural details about 100 times smaller than a bacterial cell by guiding metal particles into the desired form using soft polymers.
Read » | 0 comments

Bee disease a mystery
imageScientists are one step closer to understanding the recent demise of billions of honey bees after making an important discovery about the transmission of a common bee virus.
Read » | 1 comments
» Current Poll
What do you believe is the greatest age reached by a human being?
Less than 120 years - 16.67%
2 Votes
121 to 130 years - 58.33%
7 Votes
131 to 140 years - 16.67%
2 Votes
141 to 200 years - 0%
0 Votes
201 to 500 years - 0%
0 Votes
More than 500 years - 8.33%
1 Vote
Total Votes: 12
You may not vote on this poll.
» Random Social Groups
ESP
4 members | 10 pictures
Aquarium Keeping
4 members | 13 pictures
Star Trek
3 members | 0 pictures
Google Lunar X-Prize: Team Hypography
3 members | 0 pictures
Photographers
7 members | 40 pictures
» View All Groups
Sponsors

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.1.0
Copyright © 2000-2008 Hypography
Part of the Hypography - Science for Everyone Network