Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Not Even Close.

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Luis Hamburgh on October 30, 2001 22:47:07 UTC

You fail to understand the distinction between inference and direct observation.

After inferring the existence of "singular points," but never having observed a single photon, Einstein stressed that his point model was only a necessity to get around the apparent paradox of light's action-at-a-distance. That is, his "point" was only a tentative concept required to resolve the apparent incompatibility between corpuscular and undulatory theories of light. Einstein specifically warned against assigning importance to his "points," emphasizing that it ought not lead to "an exact theory."

He knew the difference between inference and observation, but unfortunately many individuals are not aware of Albert Einstein's provisional view of the utility of his own point model.

So, since you criticize theists for establishing the existence of "God" merely upon inference, I await any proof that the photon has been directly observed. Otherwise your criticism of theists is hypocritical.

-LH

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2020 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins