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

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Logic Alan, Logic!

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Richard D. Stafford, Ph.D. on February 15, 2002 15:29:13 UTC


>>>What do you mean by "witness"?>What cause have you to single me out for this objection?>>The issue of "epicycles" versus "Einstein" is not a truth issue in that way. It is a freedom issue where you may choose either model so long as you are consistent.>This seems a strange comment: "Do you comprehend the problems with the one on Quantum? He completely fails to take into account the consequences of atomic and molecular structure! If you do, the sizes of all the structures go way up and the picture changes completely."

If you did that, you would defeat the purpose of Gamow; which was to exaggerate one aspect of quantum theory at the expense of the others. If you inflated everything, you would be back to square one. It would be like shrinking Mr. Tomkins to atom-size.

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2024 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