After observing the direction Physics is taking, I am becoming
more and more convinced that Physics is the coming religion in the
west.

If one examines various religions, especially Christianity it is
amazing how similar they are. In fact I would go as far as to suggest
that, given the present trends, in another 2000 years from now, Physics
will be on the same level in the west as Christianity is today. In the
year 4000 Christianity will have just about died out in the face of
more and more scientific advances, all of which continue to erode the
idea of a God system of belief. Replacing it with a religion based on
science, with Physics at its heart. It will offer solace to the average
man by explaining WHY he is here and MOST of the mysteries of life in
general. I say MOST as not only will science still have a lot to
discover, even then, but a little mystery adds spice to any religion. I
have listed some examples of their similarity below no doubt you could
add others:-


Both have a something from nothing type of instant universe creation,
the big bang on the one hand and 6 days on the other.


Both claim that the universe was created from forces beyond our
understanding, yet, forces that we will eventually understand.


Both enshrine their ideas of the forces involved in creation, in books
that are in the most part ambiguous to the average reader, requiring
interpretation from scientists/priests.


Both have experts in their field scientists on the one hand, priests on
the other, both preaching from privileged positions, their
interpretation of the word to the inferior masses below them.


Both have special buildings dedicated to their field of worship,
churches and labs.


Both have prophets who came before the master to preach the word and
prepare the way, Aryabhata, Dignaga, Dharmakirti, Alhazen, Sir Isaac
Newton, etc. for Physics and Yehoshua, Shmu'el, Isaiah, Moses etc for
the Christians.


Both had a messiah, a saviour or liberator to show them a new way Jesus
for the Christians and Einstein for the Physicists.


Both have an old and new verification of their greatness, in physics
old Mechanics, & new Relativistic mechanics & Quantum mechanics.
Christianity has the old testament and new testament. Plus many other
similar old and new writings in both fields all reinforcing each other.


Both have their commandments, in the case of Christianity the 12 off we
all know, I hope, and in Physics some of the most significant are
Conservation : Boyle's :Special Relativity : General Relativity :
Inertia : Heat Conduction : Gravitation: Coulomb's : Ohm's :
Kirchhoff's : Gauss's : Faraday's and Ampere's. Many others include
those in Quantum Mechanics etc but I will settle with these 12 for now
just to maintain a balance.


Both claim to predict the future using selected writings and the
reasoning
of their respective prophets to justify their claims.


Enough is enough, judge for yourself.

Views: 363

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Except that Physics can be put to some sort of test, and Christianity is a bunch of stories. One has formulas, the other hyperbole's. So No, I do not think they are similar despite the similarities you have drawn.
Most of the "tests" for Physics by its "high priests" lead to discovering that their original premise was wrong. Most of the "tests" for Christianity by its "high priests" only seem to reinforce that their original premise was right. Go figure
How do you figure most scientific tests discover that the original premise was wrong? Collider tests of The Standard Model have consistently reinforced The Standard Model view of the particles and forces that make up the universe. Science is not constantly overturning itself. It happens occasionally, but for the most part, new findings extend and refine old findings.
Depends how far back you go. Simply observing the current science tells you nothing. Current science of any era usually agreed with each other to a degree, from blood letting to flat Earth.
No, neither the Standard Model nor relativity contradict Newtonian physics. They just extend and refine Newtonian physics. You have fallen victim to the propaganda that science keeps changing its mind about fundamentals. This is not correct.
Little about Christianity is actually testable and most of what is has been proven false. In physics, theories are advanced, not commandments. If anything at all is certin about the universe and humans in it, it is that linear progress is coming to a screeching halt shortly, as we are already in an exponetial increase in knowledge and technology. I think it highly doubtful there will be anything called "human" in a thousand years, and if there is it will be vastly different from what we think of as human now. I suspect at least one new speciation.
Only one thing I know for certain is that I don't know anything for certain. Lots of eminent scientists in the past were adamant that a limit had been reached in certain sciences, to be proved very wrong. Sir Isaac Newton was convinced for much of his life that he would be able to change base metals into gold.
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." — Albert Einstein.
At least, if you're not certain of anything, you shouldn't use dubious quotes. Nobody ever could trace this one back to Einstein.
If the quote is good who cares who said it. Its the message that counts not the messenger.
Who cares? I do. Do you only realize where your logic leads you?

If the Protocols of The Elder of Zion is good to the Palestinian cause, then I suppose it doesn't matter it was a complete fabrication by the tsarist secret police to pursue an anti-semitic agenda.
OK then I will go with you, the messenger is more important than the message. Your right I surrender.
I wonder what misinterpretation is to you. An art? A sport? A way of life? Or just a pathology?

Suffice it to say I never said such a thing. Both the message and messenger are important, with varying degrees depending on circumstances. And sometimes, the most important is the association of message and messenger, as is the case with your 'Einstein' quote.

For the record, Einstein could very well have said this. He had an immense sense of humor, and Spinoza was his favorite philosopher. The same Spinoza who once wrote: "If facts conflict with a theory, either the theory must be changed or the facts". It wouldn't be surprising at all that Einstein made a pun from this one, just for the fun. That doesn't mean that Einstein was eager to dismiss facts when they didn't suit him, as many people seem to believe. On the contrary, there's plenty of evidence that he thought just the opposite.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service