Here's one for the religious..

[Dromedary]

The Michaelson-Morely experiment.

 

So what did this experiment disprove?

 

As far am I as aware they set out to prove that a luminous aether existed and then failed in their attempts.

 

I think you need to understand what they where trying to achieve.

[quisquose]

Phlogiston.

 

I had some dephlogisticated stuff in my garden incinerator just the other day.

[Cavegirl]

That's probably correct. I think it was the Deuteronomic purist isolationists (around 620 BCE) who really pushed the idea of the one god Yahweh. Before then there were various manifestations of Yahweh with each supporting faction fighting and killing each other - so it wasn't all that unifying really.

 

Yep sorry Ryedo I didn't get chance to reply to your previous post but I did read it. I hope what I wrote to Richard shows where we agree on this subject. Thanks for adding this detail to what I've written and I agree, the aim didn't work out. The Persians annexed the entire region within their empire under Cyrus the Great during the 6th century BC.

[Obelix]

So what did this experiment disprove?

 

As far am I as aware they set out to prove that a luminous aether existed and then failed in their attempts.

 

I think you need to understand what they where trying to achieve.

 

I'm perfectly well aware of what they were trying to acheive. The fact they couldnt find the aether with an experiement that should have shown it is proof that it doesnt exist. That's the essence of the science - test for things that are falsifiable.

[jfish1936]

So what did this experiment disprove?

 

As far am I as aware they set out to prove that a luminous aether existed and then failed in their attempts.

 

I think you need to understand what they where trying to achieve.

 

There was a theory that light waves were carried by a luminiferous Aether pervading all of space, as sound is carried in air.

The Earth moves around the sun at a "fair old lick", so we should see a difference in the observed speed of light in one of two directions at right angles to one another. Think of an L-shaped apparatus, measuring light-speed along each leg of the L; reasonable that it should be affected by the streaming of the "aether" as the Earth carries the L through it; no dofference was found, therefore the theory that light is carried by an "aether" is not supported.

[RootsBooster]

I'm perfectly well aware of what they were trying to acheive. The fact they couldnt find the aether with an experiement that should have shown it is proof that it doesnt exist. That's the essence of the science - test for things that are falsifiable.

 

Not finding something isn't exactly proof that it doesn't exist. It may be the best we can do, with the results being extremely strong evidence that it doesn't exist, but it's not 100% conclusive proof that it doesn't exist.

 

If an alien hid a small object in a room and you couldn't find it, using the most suitable method(s) you knew, within the laws of physics you were aware of, would that be proof the object doesn't exist?

 

I'm pretty sure that unicorns don't exist but I couldn't prove that they don't, even if someone told me that there's one in the room with me, I can't prove it's not.

[quisquose]

As much as I like Carl Sagan, I always cringe when I hear the quote that has been attributed to him; "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence".

 

I think it is and in that sense Obelix is correct, it's just not proof of absence which makes RootsBooster correct.

 

We can't have proof of absence, although it is useful to think that we can and to live our lives with David Hume's words (below) in mind.

 

Which brings us back to what RootsBooster said on Page 5 ...

 

"What reason is there to even consider that any of the gods may exist?"

[Waldo]

Not finding something isn't exactly proof that it doesn't exist. It may be the best we can do, with the results being extremely strong evidence that it doesn't exist, but it's not 100% conclusive proof that it doesn't exist.

 

It is strong evidence that it doesn't exist in the place(s) we have looked.

 

If an alien hid a small object in a room and you couldn't find it, using the most suitable method(s) you knew, within the laws of physics you were aware of, would that be proof the object doesn't exist?

 

Maybe the alien hid it in the room next-door?

[RootsBooster]

It is strong evidence that it doesn't exist in the place(s) we have looked.

Or that the correct method wasn't used

 

 

Maybe the alien hid it in the room next-door?

then it wouldn't be in the room, which it was

[Waldo]

Or that the correct method wasn't used

 

Or that the equipment we are using to look for it, isn't really up to the job. Of course, if the equipment we are using to look for it, isn't up to the job; that doesn't mean it's there to be found; whatever 'it' is..

 

then it wouldn't be in the room, which it was

 

You'll have to forgive me Roots; I've not really been following the thread, and may well be talking at cross-purposes.

 

I do have an interesting question relating to the god topic though...

 

Does it really matter?

 

I mean, the truth of the matter, is the truth of the matter; whatever that may be. There isn't much we can do about that, one way or the other. All we can do is live our lives as best we can, within the context of the reality that we experience.

 

So, why even spend time, worrying or speculating over the existence of god?