Is God's existence necessary?

[Ben Dhyan]

I have always said that dark energy and gravity are not measured directly but that we have named both forces (gravity and dark energy) because of our measurements of objects with mass. None of my posts have said anything differently.

You did not answer my question...I will post it again..I am doing this so we can get closure soon... The reason I want a a clear answer is that I want to know if you understand the difference between observations and measurements that stand as evidence as to the existence of dark energy....and the fact that these observations and measurements are NOT observations and measurements of dark energy. Hence the statement that dark energy can be observed and measured is not technically or scientifically correct...

I am saying that dark energy can not be observed and measured directly....I am saying that measurements of effects that are not dark energy can be observed and measured directly which is evidence of dark energy..

Now let me be clear...do you agree with me on my position as stated above....and if not, state clearly that which you do not agree?

 

[prometheus11]

I've always had closure.

I've had the facts this whole time.

I've provided you with an article on the measurements of dark energy and explained how both gravity and dark energy are observed by measuring the movements of objects with mass.

I can't do anything other than explain the facts to you as I have done this whole time.

Do you finally admit that neither gravity not dark energy are directly measured but were both named because of our observations of objects with mass?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yet you replied to that post....
You do not back peddle very well.
Might want to work on that as well

Yes I did and put it Prometheus again...it is in due process.. I think now that you agree with me but just to be sure...I'd like you to confirm it by putting to you what I put to Prometheus..

I am saying that measurements of effects that are not dark energy can be observed and measured directly which is evidence of dark energy.

Do you agree with me on my position as stated above....and if not, state clearly that with which you do not agree?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I've always had closure.

I've had the facts this whole time.

I've provided you with an article on the measurements of dark energy and explained how both gravity and dark energy are observed by measuring the movements of objects with mass.

I can't do anything other than explain the facts to you as I have done this whole time.

Do you finally admit that neither gravity not dark energy are directly measured but were both named because of our observations of objects with mass?

Sorry ....no closure yet...for you are conflating gravity with dark energy...dark energy does not move....dark energy is omnipresent....the effects caused by dark energy are reflected in gravitation effects seen in the universal expansion...

 

[prometheus11]

Sorry ....no closure yet...for you are conflating gravity with dark energy...dark energy does not move....dark energy is omnipresent....the effects caused by dark energy are reflected in gravitation effects seen in the universal expansion...

I don't need closure because I've always had it. I had it before the discussion began.

I'm not conflating dark energy and gravity. I'm explaining that they are both observed in the same way. Gravity is NOT directly measured EXACTLY like dark energy is not directly measured. Both are inferred (and named) because of what we observe objects with mass doing...moving in predictable ways. Both are omnipresent.

 

[prometheus11]

dark energy does not move....
Gravity doesn't either.

............

dark energy is omnipresent....
Gravity is omnipresent, too.

............

the effects caused by dark energy are reflected in gravitation effects seen in the universal expansion...

Your syntax obfuscates the process, but I have no desire to explain to you how it should be worded.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I don't need closure because I've always had it. I had it before the discussion began.

I'm not conflating dark energy and gravity. I'm explaining that they are both observed in the same way. Gravity is NOT directly measured EXACTLY like dark energy is not directly measured. Both are inferred (and named) because of what we observe objects with mass doing...moving in predictable ways. Both are omnipresent.

Dark energy is a universal substance that is omnipresent, contains 65% of the mass of the universe....but dark energy is not a force....Yes?
Gravity is a force that exists between all objects in the omnipresent universe that have mass...but gravity of itself has no mass.....yes?

Do you see these are two different 'animals'....one is mass-less force..and the other is a force-less mass...you are trying to compare oranges and apples...

 

[Rick O'Shez]

....your syntax obfuscates...

You nailed it there.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

the effects caused by dark energy are reflected in gravitation effects seen in the universal expansion....

This I've been saying as evidence that dark energy itself can not be observed all along....but the gravity effect can...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

You nailed it there.

So what brings you here Spiny Norman sniping away as norm....

So since you are here, what do you have to say about this....

Dark energy is a universal substance that is omnipresent, contains 65% of the mass of the universe....but dark energy is not a force....Yes?
Gravity is a force that exists between all objects in the omnipresent universe that have mass...but gravity of itself has no mass.....yes?

Do you see these are two different 'animals'....one is mass-less force..and the other is a force-less mass...Prometheus is trying to compare oranges and apples...

Agree or disagree....if you disagree, please state your reason clearly...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Do you finally admit that neither gravity nor dark energy are directly measured but were both named because of our observations of objects with mass?

Our disagreement was about dark energy and whether or not it could be observed ad measured directly.....you have finally agreed with my position....it can't!

As to the understanding of dark energy and gravity....dark energy can not be observed....hence the prefix 'dark'....gravity otoh is a force....it can be observed...hence the formula I've posted that expresses it...

Do you agree or not agree....if you disagree...please explain what it is you do not agree with?

 

[prometheus11]

I have always said the same thing, Ben. That you can't grasp the facts isn't my problem.

Gravity and dark energy are both forces and are both detected by observations of matter. Neither are directly detected. Scientists gave gravity and dark energy their names because the evidence of matter moving forced them to provide names to both forces.

If you do not agree with the facts I have laid at your feet about a thousand times now, that's not my problem and it bothers me and the physicists around the globe not one bit.

 

[Shad]

I see an faulty comparison fallacy in the works here.

 

[Unification]

You did not answer my question...I will post it again..I am doing this so we can get closure soon... The reason I want a a clear answer is that I want to know if you understand the difference between observations and measurements that stand as evidence as to the existence of dark energy....and the fact that these observations and measurements are NOT observations and measurements of dark energy. Hence the statement that dark energy can be observed and measured is not technically or scientifically correct...

I am saying that dark energy can not be observed and measured directly....I am saying that measurements of effects that are not dark energy can be observed and measured directly which is evidence of dark energy..

Now let me be clear...do you agree with me on my position as stated above....and if not, state clearly that which you do not agree?

Isn't it ironic that physicists can give names to something they can't even observe or measure, don't even know if it exists all while folks condemn others for giving the name "God" to something they can't observe or measure, don't even know if it exists? But they are both based on having "effects" on mass in which human beings are also composed of mass?

It's hypocrisy at its finest in the name of science in which they do not know, understand, or are aware of what they do.

 

[prometheus11]

Isn't it ironic that physicists can give names to something they can't even observe or measure, don't even know if it exists all while folks condemn others for giving the name "God" to something they can't observe or measure, don't even know if it exists? But they are both based on having "effects" on mass in which human beings are also composed of mass?

It's hypocrisy at its finest in the name of science in which they do not know, understand, or are aware of what they do.

Nope. Not ironic at all. Everywhere scientists look in the universe, they OBSERVE the forces of gravity at work. These measurements are consistent and ALWAYS there. Continual, omnipresent evidence in every direction and at every scale. Might as well provide names like "gravity, and "dark energy" since they are so detectable and measurable.

So scientists shouldn't have named gravity?

Or is it that scientists are saying that if you don't worship gravity and think properly about it, gravity will judge and punish you?

When we make consistent measurements and they are EVERYWHERE throughout the universe, we shouldn't name those forces which MUST be operating all the time throughout all the universe?

Why isn't God so measurable and detectable at all points in the universe that physicists are forced to give it a name like they are forced to do with gravity and dark energy?

 

[Unification]

Nope. Not ironic at all. Everywhere scientists look in the universe, they OBSERVE the forces of gravity at work. These measurements are consistent and ALWAYS there. Continual, omnipresent evidence in every direction and at every scale. Might as well provide names like "gravity, and "dark energy" since they are so detectable and measurable.

So scientists shouldn't have named gravity?

Or is it that scientists are saying that if you don't worship gravity and think properly about it, gravity will judge and punish you?

When we make consistent measurements and they are EVERYWHERE throughout the universe, we shouldn't name those forces which MUST be operating all the time throughout all the universe?

Why isn't God so measurable and detectable at all points in the universe that physicists are forced to give it a name like they are forced to do with gravity and dark energy?

First, I am not arguing the existence or evidence for "God" or any judgement and punishment. Your imagination is running wild and is laced with all sorts of religious perceptions.

I never mentioned gravity or naming gravity.

I was talking about dark energy. No, it's not detectable.

"Dark energy" is invisible, unmeasurable, undetectable, unknown, hypothetical.... yet you are saying that you know that it exists. It's no different than anyone saying that they know "God" exists.

Yet "God" and "dark energy" are names given due to "effects on mass."

Big deal, every second of your life and everyone else's life.... they feel and observe effects of their mass being affected by invisible, unmeasurable, undetectable, unknown, hypothetical forces. Using your logic, "might as well give names to them/it."

Why can scientists(human beings) give names to imaginary/hypothetical/unknown forces but human beings can't? Seems you're the only one judging through hypocrisy. The very thing you're laughing at you are doing yourself and aren't even aware of it. Your desperation and emotion is being observed.

"Might as well" and are "forced to".... lol. So if someone gives the name "God" to something... Why are you judging and behaving like there is a punishment if someone doesn't accept scientific names?

"Always," "everywhere," "omnipresent," in the entire universe does not make the human being exempt from such imaginary and hypothetical forces either.

 

[prometheus11]

No. Dark energy is detectable the same way gravity is detectable. Objects with mass move in predictable, measurable ways. It's measurability and detectability is why it was named. We don't know how gravity or dark energy works. You are certainly welcome to believe anything you like about dark energy or gravity, but the mathematical principles that prove its existence will always remain. You can't complain them away because dark energy's presence makes you feel comfortable.

As to the rest of your post. It doesn't pertain to me or affect anything I'm concerned about.

 

[McBell]

First, I am not arguing the existence or evidence for "God" or any judgement and punishment. Your imagination is running wild and is laced with all sorts of religious perceptions.

I never mentioned gravity or naming gravity.

I was talking about dark energy. No, it's not detectable.

"Dark energy" is invisible, unmeasurable, undetectable, unknown, hypothetical.... yet you are saying that you know that it exists. It's no different than anyone saying that they know "God" exists.

Yet "God" and "dark energy" are names given due to "effects on mass."

Big deal, every second of your life and everyone else's life.... they feel and observe effects of their mass being affected by invisible, unmeasurable, undetectable, unknown, hypothetical forces. Using your logic, "might as well give names to them/it."

Why can scientists(human beings) give names to imaginary/hypothetical/unknown forces but human beings can't? Seems you're the only one judging through hypocrisy. The very thing you're laughing at you are doing yourself and aren't even aware of it. Your desperation and emotion is being observed.

"Might as well" and are "forced to".... lol. So if someone gives the name "God" to something... Why are you judging and behaving like there is a punishment if someone doesn't accept scientific names?

"Always," "everywhere," "omnipresent," in the entire universe does not make the human being exempt from such imaginary and hypothetical forces either.

 

[prometheus11]

Cubed.

 

[Unification]

I have always said the same thing, Ben. That you can't grasp the facts isn't my problem.

Gravity and dark energy are both forces and are both detected by observations of matter. Neither are directly detected. Scientists gave gravity and dark energy their names because the evidence of matter moving forced them to provide names to both forces.

If you do not agree with the facts I have laid at your feet about a thousand times now, that's not my problem and it bothers me and the physicists around the globe not one bit.

"neither are directly detected" OR measured.

Why do you believe in something that is invisible, undetectable, hypothetical, unknown, do not even know if it exists, and has no physical evidence?