Re: no proof against creationism

On Jun 20, 12:24 pm, Lorentz <drosen0...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
First I want to see your "proof" against the Pink
Invisible Unicorn that created the universe, then
I want you to explain how someone goes about
proving a negative.

I have met this problem in another context: going faster than
light. I meet people who find out I am a physicist, and they say
something like, "Physicists quote relativity as a fact. Relativity
says that nothing goes faster than the speed of light. Therefore,
physicists are claiming one can't go faster than the speed of light.
However, obviously one can't prove that nothing goes faster than the
speed of light. One of these days, we will be able to go to other
planets faster than the speed of light. Therefore, physicists don't
know what they are talking about."
Although the arguement fails on several points, the most
satisfactory answer for me is, "I believe there may be a way to go
faster than light, but I don't know how. Please tell me how."
Sometimes I am lucky and the person is arrogant enough to argue
past this point. They generally give me a proposed method, which they
believe obvious and self evident. They usually have a method. The
presumption was that I as an authority was too narrow and brain washed
to see the obvious truth. However, the weakness in the method is
usually very obvious to me. So I explain how THAT method won't work.

One can travel faster than light.

If you could build a ship that travelled at .98 the speed
of light, and travelled out 5 light years and came back,
ten years would have passed on earth.
However, because of time dilation, the
5 light year journey took only 1 year
for the people on the ship, and one year
back, thus aging only 2 years, and jumping
8 years into the future when they got back
to earth.

D = R * T

10 light years = R * two years aged.

What is the rate of travel?
R = 5c for the people on
the ship.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: no proof against creationism
    ... physicists are claiming one can't go faster than the speed of light. ... ten years would have passed on earth. ... for the people on the ship, ... are achieving this "faster than light" travel by mixing reference ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: no proof against creationism
    ... physicists are claiming one can't go faster than the speed of light. ... ten years would have passed on earth. ... for the people on the ship, ... are achieving this "faster than light" travel by mixing reference ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: no proof against creationism
    ... physicists are claiming one can't go faster than the speed of light. ... for the people on the ship, ... are achieving this "faster than light" travel by mixing reference ... I don't see that there's much to debate about. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: no proof against creationism
    ... physicists are claiming one can't go faster than the speed of light. ... for the people on the ship, ... are achieving this "faster than light" travel by mixing reference ... I don't see that there's much to debate about. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: no proof against creationism
    ... If you could build a ship that travelled at .98 the speed ... ten years would have passed on earth. ... What is the rate of travel? ... When I get into the issues of acceleration, of course, I lose ...
    (talk.origins)