Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Formula? Formula?

03-14-2014 , 12:24 PM
E-S1-S2=G

Everything - Superstition - Science = God
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 12:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1234
E-S1-S2=G

Everything - Superstition - Science = God
superstition and science could also be part of god.
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 12:37 PM
Nothing is gained by casting your definition as a formula
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 12:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by neeeel
superstition and science could also be part of god.
is that different than S1 and S2 being 0?
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 12:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by uke_master
Nothing is gained by casting your definition as a formula
to understand you better, does this hold true for other tangible things as well?
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 01:03 PM
Your statement is hardly tangible.

As a general rule of thumb, use plain English, as you could here, except when the formalism of mathematical symbols provides a distinct advantage such as a precision not allowed for in English, or perhaps as a shorthand for efficiency in a long exposition, and so on. Using it just to try and add gravitas and depth to superficial nonsense doesn't help anyone.
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 01:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by uke_master
Your statement is hardly tangible.

As a general rule of thumb, use plain English, as you could here, except when the formalism of mathematical symbols provides a distinct advantage such as a precision not allowed for in English, or perhaps as a shorthand for efficiency in a long exposition, and so on. Using it just to try and add gravitas and depth to superficial nonsense doesn't help anyone.
If we re arrange the formula, for the summation of what equals everything.

What is the real word for 'everything' that is the sum of all (whether we have defined them or proved them).

We do/don't have such a word, or you can't understand the question?
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 01:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1234
E-S1-S2=G

Everything - Superstition - Science = God
What do you intend this equation to accomplish? Why I can't I write down the equation "God = Everything" or "Science = Superstition"?
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 01:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W.
What do you intend this equation to accomplish? Why I can't I write down the equation "God = Everything" or "Science = Superstition"?
Sometimes i don't know my intentions.

We expect that science can explain everything, but until we disprove god, we must allow the variable (since if there is no god it can just be zero).

If one holds onto something science cannot disprove, it might be a connection to god, or if their is no god, then it is superstition that is not yet touched by science.
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 01:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1234
Sometimes i don't know my intentions.
That would explain why sometimes your posts don't make any sense.

Quote:
We expect that science can explain everything...
We do?
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 01:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W.


We do?
Well i mean i put up a formula in which we don't...
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 02:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1234
Well i mean i put up a formula in which we don't...
So which is it?
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 02:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W.
So which is it?
differently groups of people grouped differently view it differently, but i think we encapsulated the possibilities, maybe.
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 02:49 PM
Newuy either is an idiot or isn't an idiot, some think he is, some think he isn't, I think I have encapsulated all the possibilities.
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 03:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by uke_master
Newuy either is an idiot or isn't an idiot, some think he is, some think he isn't, I think I have encapsulated all the possibilities.
It's a bit worse than that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1234
I think then thats what I mean to say, I function from a logical system that can both accept and reject it (the law of excluded middle) interchangeably.
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 03:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W.
It's a bit worse than that.
so he either is an idiot, isnt an idiot , or is both an idiot and not an idiot?
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 03:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W.
It's a bit worse than that.
The funny thing is that his 'formula' is basically the expression for "we stop saying 'god or some other supernatural being did it' when science sheds light on how things work."

No one talks much about chariots pulling the stars and the sun around anymore, basically.

Of course, that can't quite be correct because some people still think that their god can make them sick or healthy even though we do know about germs and the immune system.

The other way to look at it is that "some people say 'god' instead of 'standard deviation'."
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 03:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by neeeel
so he either is an idiot, isnt an idiot , or is both an idiot and not an idiot?
And you'll be right and wrong, interchangeably.
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 03:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by neeeel
so he either is an idiot, isnt an idiot , or is both an idiot and not an idiot?
i think we can do best with 'and/or' and is/isn't

nonetheless its seems ukes formula did not cover the full scope of newguy, and its starts the question of whether or not i covered the full scope of 'e'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTheMick2
The funny thing is that his 'formula' is basically the expression for "we stop saying 'god or some other supernatural being did it' when science sheds light on how things work."
closer yes, you seems to see the fundamentalness (we can have fun with this word) to it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTheMick2
No one talks much about chariots pulling the stars and the sun around anymore, basically.

Of course, that can't quite be correct because some people still think that their god can make them sick or healthy even though we do know about germs and the immune system.
The other way to look at it is that "some people say 'god' instead of 'standard deviation'."
yes not quite correct i should think but more so than others i think

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W.
And you'll be right and wrong, interchangeably.
i think my op is not subject to this issue you point out.

Last edited by newguy1234; 03-14-2014 at 03:42 PM.
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 03:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1234
i think my op is not subject to this issue you point out.
It is if you expect the categories of information you're presenting to be meaningful. For example, what it allows something to both God and science at the same time, which would probably require you to redefine what "-" and "=" mean.
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 03:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W.
It is if you expect the categories of information you're presenting to be meaningful. For example, what it allows something to both God and science at the same time, which would probably require you to redefine what "-" and "=" mean.
We mean that which cannot be explained by science is godly, and that which science can explain, is not held up by god.
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 05:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1234
We mean that which cannot be explained by science is godly, and that which science can explain, is not held up by god.
"We"? You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Are you making these categories completely exclusive? What happened to "superstition"?
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 07:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W.
"We"? You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Its quicker than explaining the relationship of me to you, or us to them, or hypothetical me to hypothetical, you, or newguy or n, or irl. Its not so important, but helpful if you read into it.

Quote:
Are you making these categories completely exclusive? What happened to "superstition"?
I don't know what you mean by exclusive yet. Superstition, is because we are not sure the truth of non 0 in the god variable. If we are not sure if something is godly in its origins or just superstitious belief, it can still be said to fall in one or the other.
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 08:08 PM
I think science is rather boring. Basically science is observing and studying the past to make predictions about the future, science is essentially prophecy. So once you know the future and what is going to happen, its all rather boring.
Formula? Quote
03-14-2014 , 08:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1234
ukes formula
I don't think the word 'formula' means what you think it means.
Formula? Quote

      
m