Originally posted by Astner
The many-worlds interpretation isn't part of string theory.The main argument for the multiverse—without getting too technical—relates to the Calabi-Yau space through which the extra dimensions in m-theory are conjectured to be compactified. The problem with the moduli spaces of the Calabi-Yau space are solved with the superpotentials generated by two flux vacua leaving holes that correspond to a number different vacuums each of which is supposed to be a universe.
Once again, it's a very specific—and I'd argue: wishful—interpretation of a solution to a problem in a model that does not allow for predictions.
I was joking about ST giving scientist a bad name, just to be clear.
It does seem very ambitious and it's doubtful it is 100% accurate, but even Democritus with his very limited knowledge managed to get a mediocre solution for the problem of the constitution of the universe in realm of many diverse and countless models.
So even if the proposition is inadequate it might help in the future.
Originally posted by Robtard
I did actually, here it is again: "In the end I ultimately don't know, it's just what I choose to believe as it makes more sense to me."I'm not an ID proponent in the sense of the actual ID theory, though I don't think we can call ID a theory.
Originally posted by cdtm
Random pet peeve: If a day ever came where intelligent design was proven, skeptics would still be pricks to the faithful, claiming they're still idiots because they didn't actually know.
Btw, does everyone here know that 'Intelligent Design' was original invented to claim aliens made life on Earth, and it was later repurposed by creationists?
Originally posted by Van Hohenheim
Does anybody care to show me how this argument looks like? Any Christian's here?
I'll comment the wide majority of Christians don't believe in intelligent design. It's much more common to believe that God caused evolution.
Originally posted by Q99
Btw, does everyone here know that 'Intelligent Design' was original invented to claim aliens made life on Earth, and it was later repurposed by creationists?I'll comment the wide majority of Christians don't believe in intelligent design. It's much more common to believe that God caused evolution.
Yes, I suppose the Christian position is evolving with new scientific evidence and information.
Originally posted by Van Hohenheim
Intelligent design has been around for centuries, but it wasn't named ID necessarily.
The modern version of the argument, that specifically says that humans couldn't have come from nature because we're too complex (and which older creationism wouldn't have thought to say because us being evolved didn't seem on the table), as well as the term, and most importantly trying to pseudo-science it up in scientific language as a 'competing theory' with evolution, were set down by William A. Dembski who named the intelligent designer as a 'god or alien life force'.
Also for some irony, a number of Creationist groups are against it for not being properly biblical- it does, after all, tried to hide that t's an argument for god in non-religious term.
Well yes I was just about to talk about that, I have no problem with the idea of intelligent design for humanity. Just looking at the stuff we can do with genetic manipulation..a race vastly more advanced? Could surely of engineered us. Or modified us. But with technology, not via magic powers.
That is a lot harder to swallow then "guy who exists outside of time and space did it".
One of my favorite themes in scifi is reinterpreting natural phenomena as works of/intervention by alien superintelligence. Eg, the 2001: space odyssey Monolith; Cygnus x-1 in Contact (the book, not the film); and my favorite, from Baxter's Ring novel: the Great Attractor.
I had written a short story some years back where the accelerating expansion of the universe was due to alien superintelligence.
I'm just fascinated by the theme.
About 10 years ago a department at the University of Chicago basically announced that they thought that the human brain's evolution was the result of a "special event". Some later refer to it as the "big brain bang".
http://www.hhmi.org/news/human-brain-evolution-was-special-event
Basically the belief of Intelligent design stems from people thinking life is too complex to have developed on it's own. So you attribute it to whatever thing you want.
I have a deep infatuation for(let's say) dinosaurs, I propose dinosaurs are intelligent, so intelligent they faked their own death and created life as an experiment.
Originally posted by Surtur
About 10 years ago a department at the University of Chicago basically announced that they thought that the human brain's evolution was the result of a "special event". Some later refer to it as the "big brain bang".http://www.hhmi.org/news/human-brain-evolution-was-special-event
I do believe the biggest factor in the event they're referring to coincides with the invention of cooking- which allowed us to get more calories from the same amount of food (about 15% more), giving us more energy to work with, requiring less energy put into digestions, which, in turn, made possible a lot more high-energy adaptations related to the brain and similar.
You do sometimes run across keystone changes that make a whole lot of future changes more possible because the species is in effect running with extra power.
Like imagine if everyone just suddenly switched to a fuel that was 20% more efficient. You'd see a lot of changes from car makers that'd continue to happen for years as people found new ways to take advantage of the extra power. Different engines, some more efficient, some higher power. Things becoming lighter (doesn't have to carry as much gas for the same performance) or heavier (can carry more stuff including gas) become possible, etc..
Neanderthal can be considered 'sports utility humans,' that while popular for a time, ultimate got phased out in favor of lighter humans with better gas millage.
Originally posted by Surtur
Well yes I was just about to talk about that, I have no problem with the idea of intelligent design for humanity. Just looking at the stuff we can do with genetic manipulation..a race vastly more advanced? Could surely of engineered us. Or modified us. But with technology, not via magic powers.That is a lot harder to swallow then "guy who exists outside of time and space did it".
It is arguably more plausible, yet at the same time we have a couple 'errors' that I feel makes it unlikely.
For example, we have a small blind spot in our eyes due to where the nerves connect to the cornea.
There's no particular reason for nerves to connect there, and in some animals they connect elsewhere, resulting in no blindspot.
There's a lot of little things that could be tweeked and improved pretty easily, and a genetic engineer would likely notice these types of things in an error check.
Originally posted by Mindship
Go on.
Originally posted by Q99
For example, we have a small blind spot in our eyes due to where the nerves connect to the cornea.There's no particular reason for nerves to connect there, and in some animals they connect elsewhere, resulting in no blindspot.
There's a lot of little things that could be tweeked and improved pretty easily, and a genetic engineer would likely notice these types of things in an error check.
I just wanted to say this argument does make a bit of sense, but to me it especially then shows there is no benevolent god-like force, since why would God purposely give us a blindspot?