The Prayer Challenge

[chrispalasz]

If you're a seeker of God and you know you're not good and that you can never stop doing wrong - Jesus Christ can help you! If you want to know Him and Trust Him, He is willing! He accepts the broken into His arms. His Grace is FREE and He asks NOTHING in return for it!

Pray to Him, right now. Close your eyes and humble yourself before Him. Cry out to Him:

"Lord Jesus, you are the salvation of my life. You are Creator of the Universe. Touch me with your Grace, Lord, the Grace of your Salvation. Father in Heaven, I accept the sacrifice of Jesus' death on the cross for my sins against you. Thank you so much for being patient with me and showing me your mercy. I desire to follow you and reflect your goodness and love. Touch me with your healing hand and fill me with the Holy Spirit. Thank you, God, for sending your son Jesus to the cross for us, your children. Guide me through this life and leave not one of your children behind. Let your Will be done. Father, I pray in the name of your Son Jesus Christ. Amen."

Many people who are not Christians want proof that God exists, and they want it from every Christian they talk to.

Christians cannot provide proof that God exists. God can. We can provide reasoning, but ultimately you need to seek God. All you have to do, if you truly seek God, is to pray to Him. Repent for your sins and cry out to Him. Use the prayer above, or a similar one. If you truly seek God, He is faithful and He will answer you!

Non-Christians: If you decide not to take this prayer challenge, why not? Why do you come here to discuss religion? What do you hope to gain from this discussion forum? Are you trying to convince people that God does not exist?

Christians: Do you believe that through logical reasoning or debate that you can convince a non-Christian that God exists as Jesus Christ?

[chrispalasz]

juliod: The theists all know, deep down, that god can't influence the flip of a coin.

Not can't: won't.

juliod: This is how we can differentiate between real forces (like gravity) and god.

What is the difference between real forces (like gravity) and God?

juliod: When I toss coins in the air gravity makes 100% of them land on the floor. None land on the ceiling. Gravity is much more powerful than god and I don't even have to pray.

DanZ

So, you're happy because you feel like you have reliability in gravity? I'm sorry, but it's not 100%. According to physics, there is a probability that when you toss a coin up, it may not, in fact, hit the ground at all. It may fly up into the sky or some ridiculous sort. Any physicist will admit this probability to you.

If you were to knock a glass off the table and watch it shatter... there is also a probability that the glass will reconstruct itself in its original form back on the table.

What determines when these probabilities occur and when they don't occur? Of course, I won't deny that the probability is very small, but physicists also won't deny that it is possible.

So... we're really discussing a universe where many things are likely, but anything is possible. Don't be so fooled into thinking that the behaviors of this Universe are limited to what you observe. Those are the facts of science - and those are the facts we're dealing with.

[juliod]

Not can't: won't.

No, not won't. Can't. As in "God can't influence the fall of a coin, the roll of a die, the probability of road accidents, the prognosis of any illness, or any other physical event of any kind in any way whatsoever."

I would be very interested in hearing if you think you have the slightest hint of evidence that the statement above in undtrue.

What is the difference between real forces (like gravity) and God?

Simple, gravity exists and god doesn't.

you're happy because you feel like you have reliability in gravity?

No, happiness does not come into it. Gravity exists and has the effects it has regardless of my attitude towards it. It does not, for example, require sincerity in order to observe the effect of gravity.

I'm sorry, but it's not 100%. According to physics, there is a probability that when you toss a coin up, it may not, in fact, hit the ground at all. It may fly up into the sky or some ridiculous sort. Any physicist will admit this probability to you.

You are mistaken in this. There is no physical principle that allows for the suspension of gravity. If I toss a coin (toss; not launch from an electromagnetic rail gun) it will be accelerated by gravity towards the center of the earth. To presume that there might be some unknown alteration to the fabric of spacetime at that exact moment is unreasonable.

If you were to knock a glass off the table and watch it shatter... there is also a probability that the glass will reconstruct itself in its original form back on the table.

No, there isn't.

You can test this for yourself. Try modelling a far simpler situation that would be expected to be very much more likely. Get a bag of ball bearings. Put, say, 10,000 at a time on a table and roll them off. Count how many spontaneously reverse and come back up onto the table. (Use a soft flooring such a carpet so you don't confuse elastic collision with a genuine reversal of gravity.) Keep at it until you are convinced it doesn't happen.

DanZ

[potwalloper.]

Greenlight311 wrote

So, you're happy because you feel like you have reliability in gravity? I'm sorry, but it's not 100%. According to physics, there is a probability that when you toss a coin up, it may not, in fact, hit the ground at all. It may fly up into the sky or some ridiculous sort. Any physicist will admit this probability to you.

If you were to knock a glass off the table and watch it shatter... there is also a probability that the glass will reconstruct itself in its original form back on the table.

What determines when these probabilities occur and when they don't occur? Of course, I won't deny that the probability is very small, but physicists also won't deny that it is possible.

A link to the paper detailing the theoretical basis for these assertions would be useful. I may need to tie a string to all of my coins to prevent them from flying off into the sky...

[mrmufin]

Hi there, GreenLight311...

I think that juliod gave adequate treatment to your not-so-scientific assertions, but I'd just like to toss in my spare change...

So... we're really discussing a universe where many things are likely, but anything is possible.

Eh. What we should concern ourselves with are not those bumper sticker assertions about all things being possible, but rather the probability of particular events. While it may be possible that George W. Bush will kiss my ever-widening heretical arse in Macy's front window at high noon tomorrow (after delivering a globally simulcast broadcast of his heartfelt apologies for the senseless loss of thousands of lives in a war in Iraq based on conjecture, assumption, and hyperbole rather than credible evidence), the probability of such an event is extraordinarily low. So extraordinarily low, in fact, that I will most likely put on my workclothes and head on off for another day of pushin' broom with a nary a further thought of such an event materializing...

Don't be so fooled into thinking that the behaviors of this Universe are limited to what you observe.

Don't be so fooled into thinking ourunderstanding of the mechanics of the Universe is so shoddy that we're unable to make a wealth of useful, testable, predictive statements about nature.

Those are the facts of science - and those are the facts we're dealing with.

Thanks for the update; I'll make a footnote or two in the back of Six Not-so-Easy Pieces.

Regards,
mrmufin

[bernee51]

I'm sorry, but it's not 100%. According to physics, there is a probability that when you toss a coin up, it may not, in fact, hit the ground at all. It may fly up into the sky or some ridiculous sort. Any physicist will admit this probability to you.

You are mistaken in this. There is no physical principle that allows for the suspension of gravity. If I toss a coin (toss; not launch from an electromagnetic rail gun) it will be accelerated by gravity towards the center of the earth. To presume that there might be some unknown alteration to the fabric of spacetime at that exact moment is unreasonable.

I rarely agree with GL on anything (despite the fact that we think 99% alike ), however in this case...

In normal or average conditions and without special apparatus, a coin will fall to the ground when droppeds. Therefore, the statement “If I drop a coin from my hand, it will fall to the ground” is more true than the statement “If I drop a coin from my hand, I will not fall to the ground.”
It is important to realize that the first statement – “If I drop a coin from my hand, it will fall to the ground” is not absolutely true.

As I understand it, and I am perfectly willing to admit my error if it should prove to be incorrect, Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle assures us that there is a rare but not impossible chance that it will not fall (to the ground). Nevertheless, the odds against such an event are so astronomically high – and the odds in favour of falling are so close to absolutely certain – that the only reasonable and rational assumption to draw, based on all the available evidence, is that it will fall.

It’s not absolutely true, but it’s so very close to being absolutely true that no sane person would risk her or his life on the chance that it is not true. e.g. say by jumping of a tall building.

Same with god...there is absolutely no evidence, AFAIAC, of the existence of a god, so the possibility that a god exists somewhere, while extremely remote (like a coin not falling when dropped) cannot be dismissed.

OTOH the JCI god as ascribed to by GL is a logical impossibility - sort of like a married bachelor.

[juliod]

Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle assures us that there is a rare but not impossible chance that it will not fall (to the ground).

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle is the notion that it is impossible to simultaneously know the position and momentum of an electron. Not really relevant to gravity.

DanZ

[bernee51]

Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle assures us that there is a rare but not impossible chance that it will not fall (to the ground).

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle is the notion that it is impossible to simultaneously know the position and momentum of an electron. Not really relevant to gravity.

DanZ

As I said...

"I am perfectly willing to admit my error if it should prove to be incorrect..."

However I think it also applies to all sub atomic particles. e.g. quarks, mesons etc.

OTOH from

"Heisenberg challenged the notion of simple causality in nature, that every determinate cause in nature is followed by the resulting effect. Translated into "classical physics," this had meant that the future motion of a particle could be exactly predicted, or "determined," from a knowledge of its present position and momentum and all of the forces acting upon it. The uncertainty principle denies this, Heisenberg declared, because one cannot know the precise position and momentum of a particle at a given instant, so its future cannot be determined. One cannot calculate the precise future motion of a particle, but only a range of possibilities for the future motion of the particle. (However, the probabilities of each motion, and the distribution of many particles following these motions, could be calculated exactly from Schrödinger's wave equation.)"

Thus all the particles which go to make up the coin and the other particles extant in the rest of the universe which are acting (gravitationally) on it cannot be absolutely predicted to act in a particular way. The overwhelming evidence is that they will but it is not a given.

[potwalloper.]

The Uncertainty Principle, as I understand it, applies at a quantum level - where many effects that would not be explainable by the classical models of physics occur.

However this cannot be extrapolated to effects at a non-quantum level - eg it is possible at a quantum level for a sub-atomic particle to pass through two holes at the same time, or for something to be both a particle and a wave at the same time. I'm sure nobody is saying that a coin can pass through two parrallel holes at the same time...

Now unless you can create a coin that is made up of a single sub-atomic particle then I don't think that Heisenberg would apply here...

There are only two ways that I can see it that a coin can drop upwards rather than fall towards the centre of gravity

1 If you are travelling on the "Vomet Comet" and drop the coin during a period of weightlessness (in which case, strictly speaking, the Comet will be moving downwards relative to the coin rather than the coin moving upwards per se)

Or

2 If we accept the metaphysical implications of an infinite universe and therefore accept the proposal that somewhere in an infinite universe there will be a place where the laws of gravity do not function in accordance with observed effects here...not an argument that I have ever been able to give credence to I'm afraid.

Take ten trillion coins and drop them one after the other in controlled conditions on the surface of the Earth. If a single one of them falls upwards rather than downwards I will join the Republican Party, kiss George Bush's ass while singing Come All Ye Faithful and will declare my allegiance to God the almighty!

[bernee51]

The Uncertainty Principle, as I understand it, applies at a quantum level - where many effects that would not be explainable by the classical models of physics occur.

However this cannot be extrapolated to effects at a non-quantum level -

Was Heisenberg certain of this? Certain of anything?

Take ten trillion coins and drop them one after the other in controlled conditions on the surface of the Earth. If a single one of them falls upwards rather than downwards I will join the Republican Party, kiss George Bush's ass while singing Come All Ye Faithful and will declare my allegiance to God the almighty!

Let's see...

one - nope, two - nah, three - bugger, four - was that a flutter?, five...

This could take a while, but with the payoff on offer...

[mrmufin]

The Uncertainty Principle, as I understand it, applies at a quantum level - where many effects that would not be explainable by the classical models of physics occur.

However this cannot be extrapolated to effects at a non-quantum level -

Was Heisenberg certain of this? Certain of anything?

Bernee51,

Here's another quote from the same website that you cited (boldface emphasis added by me):

"One should note that Heisenberg's uncertainty principle does not say 'everything is uncertain.' Rather, it tells us very exactly where the limits of uncertainty lie when we make measurements of sub-atomic events."

This statement appears consistent with potwalloper's understanding of Heisenberg uncertainty. Here in the macroscopic realm, certainty is more assurable. One of the challenges in modern physics, as you're probably aware, is a "grand unified theory" (aka string theory or M-theory, or whatever they're calling it this week) to bridge the microscopic and macroscopic realms. I have noticed that a not-so-uncommon tactic among some proponents of a particular worldview is to toss around misinterpretations of various scientific and/or mathematical propositions in an attempt to bolster their position with an aura of scientificocity.

As to the original prayer challenge that GreenLight311 proposed in this thread... well, I just gave it a whirl. What can I conclude if nothing at all happens? Does that mean that God doesn't exist? Maybe he's just out to lunch. Or maybe he took the day off. Perhaps the prayer switchboard is down today.

Regards,
mrmufin