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

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

I'm no physicist but I am under the impression that a singularity, however small, is comprised of something tangible.
Tangible to the laws of physics? Neither am I a physicist, but I was under the impression that travel back far enough and the laws of physics don't apply.
That's not my impression
Sorry, I would also have to disagree with you. Religion, as I read its definition, is a belief-based view of the universe while Physics is a model of the universe, based upon observation. Also, your points seem to try and link the two in the language of religion (i.e. "commandments", "messiah", "prophets"). Try approaching it from the other direction and see how it would work out - link religion to physics using scientific jargon that is more precise and less nebulous. I bet that would prove to be more interesting.
-R
Sorry I must disagree, Religion is a faith based view(belief that is not based on proof), while Physics is a belief based view(an opinion or conviction). Trouble is faith either exists or it does not while belief can change and adapt. I am uncertain what difference titles would mean. They are only names we have used to describe something, call a priest a paedophile for long enough and that will become his official title.
I would use the word acceptance instead of belief, but whatever.
Still, try what I suggested... see how that works out. It may make your point clearer and more valid.
As I pointed out before Religion is a faith based view of the Universe, science is more a belief based view, their belief based on observation and logic, which in most cases, to now, has proven to be misleading. For some reason since the dawn of time every scientist of his era has thought he was right, while most have since been proven wrong, except today of course when every scientist thinks he is right....
This is ridiculous on its face. How can you claim that most scientists have been proven wrong? Do you have any data to back this up? That is a profoundly antiscientific viewpoint. If it were true, then the solid scientific results our modern world was built on would be a mirage, and airplanes would all fall out of the sky.
Many "scientists" have existed since the dawn of time, add to them all the "theories" they held, then subtract those that were correct and I think you will find the greater number were wrong. its very simplistic to say just because a few theories were right and advanced mankind then all scientific theories must all be right. Do you actually believe that more scientists since the dawn of time were right than were wrong?
I didn't say all scientific theories must all be right. Don't put words in my mouth.

Scientists who base their understanding of the universe on careful observation and reason are generally right as far as they can go with the tools of the time. Obviously, they are not always correct, but it is a common misunderstanding to assume that science is wrong more often than not. If that were true, we would be truly benighted. In any case, it doesn't even make sense, because science is self-correcting. Wrong guesses are not that important when you have a system that weeds them out. Religion can't do that. Religion has no interest in doing that. Religion loses if it does that.
Wait, you're trying to argue that the process of testing reality is a religion?

There's no belief in physics, just a constant desire to test and re-test everything we come across... if you declared physics to be a religion, math, chemistry, astronomy, electronics, mechanics, and even engineering would have to be considered religions as well.

I just don't see it.

The understanding of the relationship between energy and matter simply isn't a religion... nobody worships it.
Is not the creation of religion an effort by our ancestors to test (explain) "reality"

There is only "belief" (an opinion or conviction) in physics, but I agree there is very little faith.

OUR understanding of the relationship between energy and matter may not be a religion but its certainly an obsession, to some, equally as strong as any religion.

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