Symmetry may be very familiar and intuitive to us, but how can we talk about symmetry mathematically? We know that triangles and spheres both possess kinds of symmetry, but how are they related? The mathematics of symmetry can be described by "Group Theory".
Well, I'm trying my hand at making videos with my trusty whiteboard. Here's a video of me rambling about the nature of light.
It's a phrase you'll often hear if you try and press physicists for answers to the most difficult questions. "What happens at the center of a black hole?", "What happened in the first moments of the Big Bang?" Modern physics is currently not advanced enough to be able to give answers to these questions.
I think that "atheism of the gaps" is a legitimate fallacy, but not one that atheists often make. I think this term has the annoying potential to be thrown incorrectly at atheists if it starts becoming mainstream.
I really wish people would stop planting the laws of thermodynamics in their arguments as if they're an irrefutable line of defence. Thermodynamics is 19th century physics, we've moved on.
This is why I say that the universe must contain time. The universe is best thought of as a static 4-dimensional shape of which slices are all we can perceive. What really bites is that we all perceive different slices of this 4-dimensional shape, and how would that be possible if the universe were only 3D?
The Second Premise Having discussed the deficiencies of the first premise in my previous article (Part 1) we can now move on to the second premise. The second premise states that "The universe began to exist". Now I have actually written an article before about why it is exactly that it is misleading to say... Continue Reading →
While I can find no fault with the deductive validity of this argument - the conclusion certainly seems to follow from the premises - I'm afraid this is as successful as the argument gets. Not just one, but both of the premises commit logical fallacies which they hide in the vagueness of their formulation.