Approaching God from a scientific point of view

Use this forum to discuss the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science deals with the assumptions, foundations, and implications of science.
Post Reply
User avatar
Whitedragon
Moderator
Posts: 920
Joined: November 14th, 2012, 12:12 pm

Approaching God from a scientific point of view

Post by Whitedragon » April 16th, 2018, 12:11 pm

Approaching God from a scientific point of view

I’d like open this thread by asking a question: would atheists be willing to entertain the idea of a god notion if god was scientifically approachable?

Important, I do not aim to discuss any doctrines or religious views or teachings here.

First of all I’d like to touch on immortality. There are a few ideas I’d like to borrow from Star Trek, which are in accordance or quasi accordance with scientific theory.

Number one, Time dilation. We all should be familiar with the fact that traveling at relativistic speeds could change time and that one might return to a world that could be much older than you. In the episodes of Star Trek Voyager, “Gravity” and “In the blink of an eye,” similar situations were encountered. In the episode “Gravity” Tom Paris, the Doctor, and Tuvok crash-landed on a desert-like planet, only to discover later that there was a time difference between them and Voyager. They spent months on this world, while in reality only a few days went by for the rest of the universe. On the episode “In the blink of an eye,” Voyager came across and was caught in orbit of a planet with a high rotation, which had the same effect on them. The people of this planet viewed them in the beginning as a new god/star, which they revered. Voyager literally saw civilizations rise and fall, until the inhabitants of the planet eventually achieved the technological ability to help them break orbit.

Secondly, there was another double episode on ST Voyager, called, “Year of Hell,” where voyager encountered a species with temporal technology. In this double episode, there was a “time-ship,” capable of altering history by erasing planets and other objects from time. What I’m interested in this episode, is how the crew from the time ship managed to stay free from the change they caused. Their temporal shields kept them out of alignment with space-time, which granted them, (in a sense), immortality.

Lastly, I’d like to consider our life-span to that of certain animals. Some animals have very short life spans, whereas other creatures may live much longer than we do, yet we inhabit the same planet and space-time.

Drawing from all this information, could a being exist for whom time passes differently than us? Also, could that being be viewing the rest of the universe from a place or dimension that exists in time dilation to ours? Lastly could a being exist, whose DNA is free from the defect of aging?
We are a frozen spirit; our thoughts a cloud of droplets; different oceans and ages brood inside – where spirit sublimates. To some our words, an acid rain, to some it is too pure, to some infectious, to some a cure.

User avatar
Halc
Posts: 39
Joined: March 17th, 2018, 9:47 pm

Re: Approaching God from a scientific point of view

Post by Halc » April 16th, 2018, 4:24 pm

Whitedragon wrote:
April 16th, 2018, 12:11 pm
Approaching God from a scientific point of view

I’d like open this thread by asking a question: would atheists be willing to entertain the idea of a god notion if god was scientifically approachable?
I don't see how the rest of this post is on topic, but maybe there's more coming. Star Trek is not a scientific point of view.
First of all I’d like to touch on immortality. There are a few ideas I’d like to borrow from Star Trek, which are in accordance or quasi accordance with scientific theory.

Number one, Time dilation. We all should be familiar with the fact that traveling at relativistic speeds could change time and that one might return to a world that could be much older than you. In the episodes of Star Trek Voyager, “Gravity” and “In the blink of an eye,” similar situations were encountered. In the episode “Gravity” Tom Paris, the Doctor, and Tuvok crash-landed on a desert-like planet, only to discover later that there was a time difference between them and Voyager. They spent months on this world, while in reality only a few days went by for the rest of the universe. On the episode “In the blink of an eye,” Voyager came across and was caught in orbit of a planet with a high rotation, which had the same effect on them. The people of this planet viewed them in the beginning as a new god/star, which they revered. Voyager literally saw civilizations rise and fall, until the inhabitants of the planet eventually achieved the technological ability to help them break orbit.
The writers of Star Trek have not even a nodding acquaintance with relativity. Being in a gravity well or high rotational speed makes the rest of the universe age more, not less. Being on or near a planet with enough gravity for significant time dilation would kill a human. Any planet rotating on the order of once per hour would fling the planet apart. It would take a rotation of only seconds to get to where relativity begins to have effect.

Immortality via dilation is possible, but it is no more immortality than is cryonics, both of which might have you around centuries from now, but not with a single additional day of life experienced. You still have the same subjective life expectancy.
Drawing from all this information, could a being exist for whom time passes differently than us?
We have no way of comparing the subjective experience of the rate of time passage between any two being. We presume that humans experience at reasonably the same rate, but there is no evidence of even that.
Also, could that being be viewing the rest of the universe from a place or dimension that exists in time dilation to ours?
It could be viewed by a different being that is way out somewhere else, but it would not be the local thing here. Somebody could for instance watch our television broadcasts as they get to some distant place. Time dilation of the observer has some effect, but red/blue shift would be a greater effect. If the observer was approaching, the blue shift would speed up the experience far more than dilation would slow it.
Lastly could a being exist, whose DNA is free from the defect of aging?
Naked mole rats come to mind. Aging is not a defect. The only reason bacteria can evolve so quickly to resist new antibiotics is because the breed and die so quickly. A being with long lifespan cannot breed quickly. The most adaptive creatures are the ones that age the fastest.

User avatar
Whitedragon
Moderator
Posts: 920
Joined: November 14th, 2012, 12:12 pm

Re: Approaching God from a scientific point of view

Post by Whitedragon » April 17th, 2018, 5:25 am

Hulc said :
I don't see how the rest of this post is on topic, but maybe there's more coming. Star Trek is not a scientific point of view.
No, ST is not a pure scientific point of view, it deals with some theories of science and adapt them according to narrative. But when you say it's not a scientific point of view, do you mean it's bogus science, or science we haven't explored yet?
The writers of Star Trek have not even a nodding acquaintance with relativity. Being in a gravity well or high rotational speed makes the rest of the universe age more, not less. Being on or near a planet with enough gravity for significant time dilation would kill a human. Any planet rotating on the order of once per hour would fling the planet apart. It would take a rotation of only seconds to get to where relativity begins to have effect.
Agreed, but the planet in question had other properties than that of a simple planet.
Immortality via dilation is possible, but it is no more immortality than is cryonics, both of which might have you around centuries from now, but not with a single additional day of life experienced. You still have the same subjective life expectancy.
Could you expand more on that?
It could be viewed by a different being that is way out somewhere else, but it would not be the local thing here. Somebody could for instance watch our television broadcasts as they get to some distant place. Time dilation of the observer has some effect, but red/blue shift would be a greater effect. If the observer was approaching, the blue shift would speed up the experience far more than dilation would slow it.
What I meant was, it is speculated that each universe resides inside a black hole, they further speculate that time slows significantly inside a black hole in comparison for someone that is outside it.
Naked mole rats come to mind. Aging is not a defect. The only reason bacteria can evolve so quickly to resist new antibiotics is because the breed and die so quickly. A being with long lifespan cannot breed quickly. The most adaptive creatures are the ones that age the fastest.
Is biology the only form of life? Also to expand on your statement of creatures evolving faster with shorter lifespans, does evolution eventually slow down or come to stand still when it has reached its evolutionary purpose? In other words, let's assume my hypothetical immortal being was more primitive, like bacteria, many billions of years ago and has reached a state where it no longer needs to evolve to such an extent. Moreover when you take a look at human DNA, some say it hasn't changed much over the last few hundred thousand years.
We are a frozen spirit; our thoughts a cloud of droplets; different oceans and ages brood inside – where spirit sublimates. To some our words, an acid rain, to some it is too pure, to some infectious, to some a cure.

User avatar
Halc
Posts: 39
Joined: March 17th, 2018, 9:47 pm

Re: Approaching God from a scientific point of view

Post by Halc » April 17th, 2018, 8:28 am

Whitedragon wrote:
April 17th, 2018, 5:25 am
Hulc said :
I'm Hulc now. Greta didn't get it right either. I think I need to change it. I just wanted something short.
No, ST is not a pure scientific point of view, it deals with some theories of science and adapt them according to narrative. But when you say it's not a scientific point of view, do you mean it's bogus science, or science we haven't explored yet?
Well, they're apparently referencing relativity (only when convenient to the plot), but doing it incorrectly, so that's bogus. They also make a complete hash of Newtons third law of motion. Stuff like the medical miracles is more on the order of undiscovered science.

It's entertainment. It was never meant to be scientifically accurate. Space-2001 attempted that, and few movies since. No television series that I know has attempted it. Star Wars threw science (and post-WWI military tactics) out the window before ever starting. Ratings wins out over accuracy ever time. This is as it should be.
Could you expand more on that?
Relativity says you are always stationary in your own frame, meaning that you will subjectively experience your ~80 years (if nothing kills you early, and plenty does in ST). I can travel quickly to a distant place and then come back and find that an arbitrary amount of time passed back home, but those years are theirs, not mine, so the effect is more like teleporting to the future. Sure, the calendar says the date is year 3000, but is that immortality if I didn't live those extra years? Ditto with cryonics, which is more a direct teleport to some future date (to Y3000, exactly the plot of the pilot episode of Futurama). None of the time in the tank is experienced, so in either case, have I lived any longer? Is it immortality then? Depends on your definition I guess.
What I meant was, it is speculated that each universe resides inside a black hole, they further speculate that time slows significantly inside a black hole in comparison for someone that is outside it.
The physics says there is no meaningful comparison of time between inside and outside. Perhaps you mean near a black hole where the concept has meaning. Time does not slow for anyone since as I said above, subjective flow of time is the same for any subject. But to an observer away from the black hole, the person near it appears to age slower via time dilation. That means to the person near the black hole, the universe runs faster, not slower as you said in the ST episode. And being near a smaller black hole is fatal. One can approach a large one, but in either case, it requires quite the technological feat to stay out of it.
Is biology the only form of life?
ST was excellent science on this front. They explored all sorts of strange life forms (gas clouds, planets, stars?, minerals). I suppose it is a linguistic choice if the the word 'biology' is to be applied to any life, or only to Earth native life (we don't know it is native to here), or only to Carbon-DNA life forms, or only wet-gloppy life.
Also to expand on your statement of creatures evolving faster with shorter lifespans, does evolution eventually slow down or come to stand still when it has reached its evolutionary purpose?
There's a purpose? A niche creature tends not to evolve much (think sharks), but is then dependent on the continuity of the niche environment. Humans are a train wreck as far as physical evolution goes, but our adaptability won over that, at least in the short term. Time will tell if humans survive the Holocene mass extinction event.
In other words, let's assume my hypothetical immortal being was more primitive, like bacteria, many billions of years ago and has reached a state where it no longer needs to evolve to such an extent.
Bacteria is already immortal. How old is the average individual? It wasn't born, so it is technically millions of years old. The concept of aging only applies to beings with a distinct beginning of life. If bacteria stopped evolving, it would be a stationary target for the antibiotics and would be wiped out.
Moreover when you take a look at human DNA, some say it hasn't changed much over the last few hundred thousand years.
I suppose that depends on what you would consider a significant change. We've not changed our number of arms or anything, no. I think we (Homo-Sapiens) did absorb the Neanderthals in that time span, which is a helluva change. Only one small tribe in Africa remains with none of that DNA at all, which is a pretty amazing feat of isolation.

Post Reply