The issue is, the experiment you suggest attempts to answer a valid question about the physical world. Independent of the likelihood of any reproducible results (which I think we agree it will be negligible), the question is valid within the realms of Science, because the effect this hypothetical scientist is trying to reproduce is measurable (water being splitted). Assuming there is no reproducible results, I see two explanations: (a), prayer has absolutely no effect on the behavior of water, or (b), there is some supernatural cause explaining the negative result (for example, God does not like being tested, has stage panic, or simply dislikes scientific rigor). Answer (b) "explains" some speculation by means of another speculation, in a regression which leads nowhere (not only within physics, also within logic). Therefore (b) has no place in a consistent explanation of the world, unless at some point it implies some falsifiable proposition (I believe this is similar to the case with String Theory). My argument is that, by Occam's razor one should stick with (a), and definitely not claim that there is a supernatural realm, the elements inside which sometimes interact with the physical world and sometimes don't, in an untestable way.
Science does not say that there is no God. It doesn't give a damn.
Actually, I think proper, honest Science should care a lot. A Universe where causality and the laws of Physics can be suspended by praying, or by miracles, is quite different from a Universe where the laws are immutable. Only a God which does not intervene at all in the processes of the Universe would be separate from Science, otherwise, it has to enter one's assumptions at some point if we are really honest about our application of the scientific method, and not simply choosing to "enable scientific mode" for some things.
You honestly believe that Joe Sixpack would be able to install Linux, but not Win XP? Are you sure? Have you installed XP recently? You put the disc in, and follow the instructions... You give Joe there anything but a Live-CD and he won't be able to install Linux any better than XP.
Have you installed Ubuntu recently? Not rocket science either. With many hardware you don't even need to reach for your drivers CD, it works "out of the box". In my experience, you always have to install at least one external (non-MS) driver manually in the case of XP.
Nice problem. I believe it is instead limited by the sound velocity in the material the ball bearings are composed of, as you don't need to push a ball completely in the tube, I think the problem is equivalent if you just 'knock' in one side to make a vibration and receive it at the other side, or even if instead of ball bearings you have a very long "chain" of atoms from here to Mars.
You are sending a wave through actual movement of matter, not electromagnetic field.
Slashdot Mirror
I know 0 meth users, and all 0 of them are rapists. That's 100%! You can't argue with statistics like that, man!
L'Hôpital fail.
Well, if he is not, then ./ is not working properly...
$S = k_B ln \Omega$.
Boltzmann for the win.
It does not help the original confusion to illustrate the point with a confusing analogy.
or being below 0 degrees Farenheit is having negative thermal energy
And you just failed physics by confusing temperature and thermal energy. Congratulations!
The issue is, the experiment you suggest attempts to answer a valid question about the physical world. Independent of the likelihood of any reproducible results (which I think we agree it will be negligible), the question is valid within the realms of Science, because the effect this hypothetical scientist is trying to reproduce is measurable (water being splitted). Assuming there is no reproducible results, I see two explanations: (a), prayer has absolutely no effect on the behavior of water, or (b), there is some supernatural cause explaining the negative result (for example, God does not like being tested, has stage panic, or simply dislikes scientific rigor). Answer (b) "explains" some speculation by means of another speculation, in a regression which leads nowhere (not only within physics, also within logic). Therefore (b) has no place in a consistent explanation of the world, unless at some point it implies some falsifiable proposition (I believe this is similar to the case with String Theory). My argument is that, by Occam's razor one should stick with (a), and definitely not claim that there is a supernatural realm, the elements inside which sometimes interact with the physical world and sometimes don't, in an untestable way.
Science does not say that there is no God. It doesn't give a damn.
Actually, I think proper, honest Science should care a lot. A Universe where causality and the laws of Physics can be suspended by praying, or by miracles, is quite different from a Universe where the laws are immutable. Only a God which does not intervene at all in the processes of the Universe would be separate from Science, otherwise, it has to enter one's assumptions at some point if we are really honest about our application of the scientific method, and not simply choosing to "enable scientific mode" for some things.
Surely it is! Either you get it, or you don't.
Great! I'm going to use that as a footnote in my thesis!
That wasn't my point. I'm just trying to point to the fact that there is a saving associated with avoiding Microsoft products.
Does conficker get "installed" at all in non-Microsoft operating systems?
Ahh, the Hollywood disease. "This needs to be redone in english and better looking"
Whatever, but don't make me smell "Scent of Sietch Tabr"
Apart from: How do you do a null / {} statement in Python.
while True: pass
Nope, nothing yet...
Researchers found to be half as bright as previously thought.
From orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
I just got curious. May I ask what kind of perversion made you look at the source code of such pr0n sites?
"Oh... yes baby! don't close those <TD>'s"
I was going to post the standard thing about "subscribing to your newsletter" but... I'm really intrigued.
Imagine if Microsoft had intelligently designed Windows....
You need to reboot Windows for everything else... *ducks for cover*
the term Vaporware Windows to a whole new level!
You honestly believe that Joe Sixpack would be able to install Linux, but not Win XP? Are you sure? Have you installed XP recently? You put the disc in, and follow the instructions...
You give Joe there anything but a Live-CD and he won't be able to install Linux any better than XP.
Have you installed Ubuntu recently? Not rocket science either. With many hardware you don't even need to reach for your drivers CD, it works "out of the box". In my experience, you always have to install at least one external (non-MS) driver manually in the case of XP.
Nice problem. I believe it is instead limited by the sound velocity in the material the ball bearings are composed of, as you don't need to push a ball completely in the tube, I think the problem is equivalent if you just 'knock' in one side to make a vibration and receive it at the other side, or even if instead of ball bearings you have a very long "chain" of atoms from here to Mars. You are sending a wave through actual movement of matter, not electromagnetic field.