UCTAA churchlight

Site Search via Google

Discussion 3 to Talk Back 81
Perhaps we should use quarks, leptons, and all the rest of the elementary particles

by: Jerry

To add to this discussion (or any other,) please use the Contact form. This discussion has been continued.

JT, perhaps my choice of the pythagorean theorem does not sit well with you. Perhaps we should use quarks, leptons, and all the rest of the elementary particles that are currently being taught. Or perhaps you would rather go macro and talk about the 99.9% of the universe that we cannot see. How about "dark matter"? The reality is that science routinely works with theories that are not proven. Scientists work with such "working theories" because they have experienced first hand that they work, even if they have not been "proven".

Probably the greatest example of this is the "Big Bang Theory". While still unproven, and it has gone through many many updates since it was first proposed it is still the model that just about any physicist uses because it has proven itself through many years.

JT, you may pick apart my specifics, and I readily admit that I wrote that in about 15 minutes based on a junior high geometry class, but what I can speak to with expert knowledge and years of experience is GOD'S role in my life. I know that HE is.

In fact in a way you make my point eloquently. This afternoon I will be pouring a small concrete form. I will be using the Pythagorean Theorem to make sure that it is square. The theorem that I believed until now to be unproven. The fact that I now know that someone has proven it makes no difference to me. My reaction that that revelevation is pretty minimal. It would be the same if someone came out today with proof of GOD. That would not have any effect on my life, I already know it.