Does the string theory prove the battle of God and Satan?

[MindHunter]

I realize now that I really should not have chose the name I did for this thread. The introdution of the string theory to the other 10 dimentions in mathmatical ralation, proves the Big Bang theory. I have always believed that seeking knowledge (through fact and/or probable theory) is one way of seeking the true Creator. I highly respect scientists and their work and was surprised to find out that more and more scientists believe that our universe can not be just left alone without some kind of source/sources to help it run in such an orderly fashion.

The underlined part is somewhat wrong. The String Theory wasn't added to 10 theoretical dimensions. The string theory consisted of about 10 theoretical dimensions. The M-theory was added to the String Theory in postulating the 11th dimension. You have some facts mixed up I believe. It doesn't exactly prove it, as the workings of the String Theory, M-theory, D-theory, etc..., are still in the works.

The bolded part is something that I tend to not understand how or why people believe it. When you say "Creator", my mind jumps to a god/goddess creating the universe. Regardless of what the belief is, it requires faith, and this does not require proof, it requires one's dedication to believing something is true/false. Applying science to this is what I find to be a bit hard to understand as you're trying to give proof for something that is inapplicable to proof and its effects are so diverse, we're not sure how many, how big, when, what, how, etc.. of them there are. How this is meant to show the "true Creator", to me first implies that other ones are false. I can understand science attempting to vaguely show that there may be an existence of a divine being (although it's rarely believable but let's assume it is), however, it cannot narrow it down to one specific being. So, how science is meant to first prove that a divine being exist, then show which one, is beyond me.

I appriciate your reply and can understand exactly where you are coming from. One of the reasons I chose not to choose a religion throughout my life is due to my respect for science and other things in which most religions can not bring themselves to accept. You may be right, this could just be fairy tale thinking, but I do know this (A) Science believes there was a Big Bang and are now looking for what may have existed before this and (B) Religions (most) believe there was a beginning to good vs. evil, I have yet to see any better time frame for the start of this than the beginning of the known universe.
Granted it may be fairy-tale thinking, but logical fairy-tale thinking.

I agree with A and B, and do admire your attempt to construct a theory on one of the grandest scales. However, you have to remember that religion needs 0 proof and science needs proof. So, you're trying to apply proof to something that is inapplicable to be proved.

 

[horizon_mj1]

Believe me I know!!! I am one of those people that one day had a happening and suddenly there was a question to the answer that seemed to have no questioning. To lay it all out, I believe in science; yet I also believe that faith has a scientific basis (rather psychological, cuturial, environmental; all which may lead back to the first). I am not saying that faith is a learned process, but would it exist without influence?

 

[logician]

The string theory is just a theory, it has no factual support as of yet.

 

[conradxiong]

I can't comprehend how string theory will ever really be TESTED in any way.

 

[horizon_mj1]

I can't comprehend how string theory will ever really be TESTED in any way.

CERN (big bang recreator)

 

[Oneatatime]

I make no claim to understand string theory so I'm not going to comment on it but I'm fairly sure that you've less of a grasp of it then I do. Like quantum physics certain areas of science seem to be popular amongst the superstitious types as explanations on the basis that they sound cool rather than because they actually know what these subjects are about and what implications they have.

 

[horizon_mj1]

I make no claim to understand string theory so I'm not going to comment on it but I'm fairly sure that you've less of a grasp of it then I do. Like quantum physics certain areas of science seem to be popular among the superstitious types as explanations on the basis that they sound cool rather than because they actually know what these subjects are about and what implications they have.

Oh really?
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/09/stringy-quantum/
String Theory Proves Useful
http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/plasmaphysics
Plasma Physics
Here is just two of the areas on the subject I study (mind you for recreation purposes only). You are right that I have had no former college or graduate training in the area, (I chose to do my studies in justice technology and criminal justice) but considering I take a large part of my personal time studying these areas, I do believe the questions I pose are relevant. If you can not understand the question's relevance, please explain what key point it is you are misunderstanding. I will do my best to clarify.

 

[Oneatatime]

You are selecting those parts of science which superficially reflect your religious beliefs about the nature of the universe. The questions based on this superficial similarity are therefore rather meaningless and moreso because of the superstitious nature of your religious beliefs.

 

[horizon_mj1]

You are selecting those parts of science which superficially reflect your religious beliefs about the nature of the universe. The questions based on this superficial similarity are therefore rather meaningless and moreso because of the superstitious nature of your religious beliefs.

WOW! You are quite bold in your statement my friend. I do not have a religion and also have very few religious beliefs beyond finding solid evidence backing what is already known. You are one to talk of being superficial, look at who is so quick to judge someone they have never even met. As far as having a superstitious nature to my religious beliefs, once again, dead wrong. I build my entire beliefs from facts and allow theory to further my studies. i feel sorry for people who are so quick to judge, they really incapacitate their abilities to learn.

 

[PolyHedral]

If anything, string theory renders God redundant.

 

[horizon_mj1]

If anything, string theory renders God redundant.

That is one of the points I have been struggling with. On one hand, we can replicate what "may" have happened, but may never know for sure; having the ability to do this I find extraordinary. On the other is this another piece of key knowledge that will we abused for vain means (trying to be the creators of our own existence)?

 

[Oneatatime]

WOW! You are quite bold in your statement my friend. I do not have a religion and also have very few religious beliefs beyond finding solid evidence backing what is already known. You are one to talk of being superficial, look at who is so quick to judge someone they have never even met. As far as having a superstitious nature to my religious beliefs, once again, dead wrong. I build my entire beliefs from facts and allow theory to further my studies. i feel sorry for people who are so quick to judge, they really incapacitate their abilities to learn.

You stated at the begining of this thread that you had a religion. If this isn't the case then don't say that it is and then critisise me for saying that you are religious.

If you are familiar with my chosen religion (All) the you can understand that I believe in trying to understand every belief and finding a truth within that belief.

As for the superficial links between your beliefs and science an example of this is your comparison good and evil to matter and anti-matter. The only thing these have in common is that both elements could be considered as being diametrically opposed. This is a pretty weak foundation to base an idea upon.

I have an interesting theory in which I would like to get other people’s opinions on that concerns the beginning of the univers as well as the beginning of good and evil, matter and anti-matter, positives and negatives ect.

The rest of what you said in your initial post was pure fantasy and only possible link to string theory was this 11th dimension. What makes this 11th dimension any more special or relevent to your ideas isn't very clear and just a quick glance at string theory shows that the M-Theory version of it has eleven dimensions. Once again this is a rather tenuous link you've formed made all the worse by no clear reason why you've selected this particular dimension.

You accuse me of being judgement but I'm just being critical of your ideas. If you don't like people being critical of you ideas then a public forum is probably not the best place to advertise them. As I said initially its no uncommon for people to pick up on individual aspects of a theory and build them into their own beliefs. Quantum theory is a popular one as I've already mentioned but plenty of other areas of science get abused and misrepresented as well.

 

[Jacksnyte]

" Does the string theory prove the battle of God and Satan? "
Um...NO!

:areyoucra

 

[horizon_mj1]

You stated at the begining of this thread that you had a religion. If this isn't the case then don't say that it is and then critisise me for saying that you are religious.

As for the superficial links between your beliefs and science an example of this is your comparison good and evil to matter and anti-matter. The only thing these have in common is that both elements could be considered as being diametrically opposed. This is a pretty weak foundation to base an idea upon.

The rest of what you said in your initial post was pure fantasy and only possible link to string theory was this 11th dimension. What makes this 11th dimension any more special or relevent to your ideas isn't very clear and just a quick glance at string theory shows that the M-Theory version of it has eleven dimensions. Once again this is a rather tenuous link you've formed made all the worse by no clear reason why you've selected this particular dimension.

You accuse me of being judgement but I'm just being critical of your ideas. If you don't like people being critical of you ideas then a public forum is probably not the best place to advertise them. As I said initially its no uncommon for people to pick up on individual aspects of a theory and build them into their own beliefs. Quantum theory is a popular one as I've already mentioned but plenty of other areas of science get abused and misrepresented as well.

Ok well I do in fact have an extremely solid religion, which just so happens to be called my beliefs. I do not nor will I "name" this; it is what it is. At least I have what seems a very simplistic "foundation" for my way to explain my personal way of differentiating and comparing good and evil. I selected to mention the M-theory because it was the theory that finally when accepted completed what some thought would remain elusive. As far as an accusation of being judgmental (or judgment as you would call it) I would hope so, that is the reason I enjoy this particular public forum. When it comes to people "picking and choosing" ANY form of information and knowledge in which to base their beliefs, what do you want, everyone to think like you?

 

[horizon_mj1]

" Does the string theory prove the battle of God and Satan? "
Um...NO!

:areyoucra

You know what I asked the same question. After testing the string theory in CERN, replication of what the big bang may have been like has been studied. One theory I have is this; Let's say before the existence of physical matter, there was none. A diversity within the existence contradicted the laws of its nature, creating a polarity in its opposition (negatives and positives) thus leading to the creation of the known universe. Some could see this creation of diversity the battle between God and Satan; the inability to coincide within the same realm..

 

[ellenjanuary]

Yeah but... there ain't no Satan.

 

[horizon_mj1]

Yeah but... there ain't no Satan.

I see the conventional belief in Satan usually relates to humanity in the sense of right and wrong. I believe the concept to be relayed in an understandable way, may have been given in relation to things we can more easily understand, not so much that the stories pertaining to Satan necessairly relate to the physical aspect as much as the mental/spiritual aspect.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

No more than it disproves God. But then again, I'm very skeptical of dimensions 4 through whatever number it now stands at (11 was were it was at one point in time, it has jumped to over 20, and honestly I cannot find any one definitive number of how many dimensions it currently stands at because there have been so many adjustments). That and considering these dimensions have exactly the same amount of evidence as does God (they both to our better understanding only exist on paper), it can't be used to prove anything.

 

[horizon_mj1]

No more than it disproves God. But then again, I'm very skeptical of dimensions 4 through whatever number it now stands at (11 was were it was at one point in time, it has jumped to over 20, and honestly I cannot find any one definitive number of how many dimensions it currently stands at because there have been so many adjustments). That and considering these dimensions have exactly the same amount of evidence as does God (they both to our better understanding only exist on paper), it can't be used to prove anything.

One of my first interest in science was dimensions. I have a theory on dimensions, but that is not an appropriate place to discuss beyond that (I confuse myself at times). Maybe if you could take all truth and knowledge (indisputable) and put it into a being, that would provide sufficient evidence of God,after all that is the only way science bases fact. I do not believe this is how it is to work though. If you are given something you are much more likely not going to appreciate it, but if you have to work hard for it, you appreciate it much more and take better care of it (this of course being a generalization). Even though CERN can recreate what we believe to be the beginning of our known universe, it will always in this dimension remain mere speculation of what actually occurred.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

But there is no definitive proof of these dimensions. I personally don't even consider time a dimension, and something that exist no more than an inch or gram. And while all we have is our best speculations to give an answer for anything, dimensions have less than this. To me these dimensions seem like nothing more than the product of a very bored mathematical genius that was in need of a challenge. We can't see them, observe them, detect them, nothing. At least Dark Matter can be detected in some forms.