Existence

[ding]

The Laws of Physics are descriptive, not prescriptive.

Science is the study of the handiwork of God.

As chemists began to discover elements in the late eighteenth century, they tried to organize them into tables. Dmitri Mendeleev, a Russian chemist and teacher, published his periodic table in 1869. He was working on a textbook for his students and trying to organize the 60 elements that were known. So he wrote the properties of the elements on cards and moved the cards around until he saw a pattern in the properties. It turns out that the properties were repeating if he arranged the elements in order of increasing atomic mass.

Mendeleev left spaces in his table, however. He knew that some elements belonged in certain groups based on properties. He predicted that elements would be discovered to fill the spaces. For example, he left spaces between zinc and arsenic, and indeed gallium and germanium were discovered in 1875 and 1886 with the properties he predicted.

In this example, prescriptive laws were discovered incompletely. Descriptive models helped to guide further discovery. Science is based on faith in an ordered physical realm.

Prescriptive and Descriptive Laws of Physics

 

[Moonglow]

 

[G.T.]

The Laws of Physics are descriptive, not prescriptive.

Science is the study of the handiwork of God.

As chemists began to discover elements in the late eighteenth century, they tried to organize them into tables. Dmitri Mendeleev, a Russian chemist and teacher, published his periodic table in 1869. He was working on a textbook for his students and trying to organize the 60 elements that were known. So he wrote the properties of the elements on cards and moved the cards around until he saw a pattern in the properties. It turns out that the properties were repeating if he arranged the elements in order of increasing atomic mass.

Mendeleev left spaces in his table, however. He knew that some elements belonged in certain groups based on properties. He predicted that elements would be discovered to fill the spaces. For example, he left spaces between zinc and arsenic, and indeed gallium and germanium were discovered in 1875 and 1886 with the properties he predicted.

In this example, prescriptive laws were discovered incompletely. Descriptive models helped to guide further discovery. Science is based on faith in an ordered physical realm.

Prescriptive and Descriptive Laws of Physics

yeah im not bored enough to get into it with a derp who doesnt even understand the basics of sound reasoning ~ have fun

 

[ding]

The Laws of Physics are descriptive, not prescriptive.

Science is the study of the handiwork of God.

As chemists began to discover elements in the late eighteenth century, they tried to organize them into tables. Dmitri Mendeleev, a Russian chemist and teacher, published his periodic table in 1869. He was working on a textbook for his students and trying to organize the 60 elements that were known. So he wrote the properties of the elements on cards and moved the cards around until he saw a pattern in the properties. It turns out that the properties were repeating if he arranged the elements in order of increasing atomic mass.

Mendeleev left spaces in his table, however. He knew that some elements belonged in certain groups based on properties. He predicted that elements would be discovered to fill the spaces. For example, he left spaces between zinc and arsenic, and indeed gallium and germanium were discovered in 1875 and 1886 with the properties he predicted.

In this example, prescriptive laws were discovered incompletely. Descriptive models helped to guide further discovery. Science is based on faith in an ordered physical realm.

Prescriptive and Descriptive Laws of Physics

yeah im not bored enough to get into it with a derp who doesnt even understand the basics of sound reasoning ~ have fun

You are accusing me of what you do.

The physical phenomenon that the laws of nature describe are prescriptive in nature. You don't have a choice in not breaking them.

 

[ding]

Yeah, I don't know what you are talking about.

What are you, a Hindu?

It's from the book of Common Prayer. You sing it. Surely, you've heard it. Not the Doxology, but I think it comes after.

Yeah, that's totally out of context of this conversation. Two different topics.

That is more in line with the first cause discussion. Or did I not have that conversation with you?

We aren't having a first cause discussion? Existence and how it came to be is not part of a "first cause?"
Look, Ding, I know when folks are splitting hairs. Not into going there. Maybe someone else here would be interested in how they're different.

The Gloria prayer is talking about the first cause. That's what I was pointing out. I'm not splitting hairs. Our existence (i.e. Our universe) is finite. You were the one who muddied the water by transposing the two.

You are very patient with those of us who have little knowledge of which we speak. This is all I know, but I would be interested in hearing more about it.
Our universe is finite.
My understanding of this, which could be wrong, is that our universe began with a Big Bang.
The Big Bang involved a black hole.
Black holes are understood to be collapsed stars.
To me, that means we were created by something that DID exist prior. It wasn't just Bang--created from nothing. The cosmos breathing in and out. We are an exhalation. Eventually that breath will end and something else will take its place.
So correct me if those assumptions are wrong. They surely could be.

I know of no theory which states our universe began as a black hole. Where or who did you hear that from?

 

[G.T.]

The Laws of Physics are descriptive, not prescriptive.

Science is the study of the handiwork of God.

As chemists began to discover elements in the late eighteenth century, they tried to organize them into tables. Dmitri Mendeleev, a Russian chemist and teacher, published his periodic table in 1869. He was working on a textbook for his students and trying to organize the 60 elements that were known. So he wrote the properties of the elements on cards and moved the cards around until he saw a pattern in the properties. It turns out that the properties were repeating if he arranged the elements in order of increasing atomic mass.

Mendeleev left spaces in his table, however. He knew that some elements belonged in certain groups based on properties. He predicted that elements would be discovered to fill the spaces. For example, he left spaces between zinc and arsenic, and indeed gallium and germanium were discovered in 1875 and 1886 with the properties he predicted.

In this example, prescriptive laws were discovered incompletely. Descriptive models helped to guide further discovery. Science is based on faith in an ordered physical realm.

Prescriptive and Descriptive Laws of Physics

yeah im not bored enough to get into it with a derp who doesnt even understand the basics of sound reasoning ~ have fun

You are accusing me of what you do.

The physical phenomenon that the laws of nature describe are prescriptive in nature. You don't have a choice in not breaking them.

 

[ding]

 

[G.T.]

The Laws of Physics are descriptive, not prescriptive.

Science is the study of the handiwork of God.

As chemists began to discover elements in the late eighteenth century, they tried to organize them into tables. Dmitri Mendeleev, a Russian chemist and teacher, published his periodic table in 1869. He was working on a textbook for his students and trying to organize the 60 elements that were known. So he wrote the properties of the elements on cards and moved the cards around until he saw a pattern in the properties. It turns out that the properties were repeating if he arranged the elements in order of increasing atomic mass.

Mendeleev left spaces in his table, however. He knew that some elements belonged in certain groups based on properties. He predicted that elements would be discovered to fill the spaces. For example, he left spaces between zinc and arsenic, and indeed gallium and germanium were discovered in 1875 and 1886 with the properties he predicted.

In this example, prescriptive laws were discovered incompletely. Descriptive models helped to guide further discovery. Science is based on faith in an ordered physical realm.

Prescriptive and Descriptive Laws of Physics

yeah im not bored enough to get into it with a derp who doesnt even understand the basics of sound reasoning ~ have fun

You are accusing me of what you do.

The physical phenomenon that the laws of nature describe are prescriptive in nature. You don't have a choice in not breaking them.

Yes, I laughed at this as well - it reaffirmed that youre incapable of fundamental reasoning to draw conclusions.

Prescriptive vs descriptive doesnt speak to an ability to break the laws. And to "reason" that the laws are prescriptive, you invoked not being able to break them.

Whats the point of arguing with invalid reasoning? It's boring.

 

[ding]

The Laws of Physics are descriptive, not prescriptive.

Science is the study of the handiwork of God.

As chemists began to discover elements in the late eighteenth century, they tried to organize them into tables. Dmitri Mendeleev, a Russian chemist and teacher, published his periodic table in 1869. He was working on a textbook for his students and trying to organize the 60 elements that were known. So he wrote the properties of the elements on cards and moved the cards around until he saw a pattern in the properties. It turns out that the properties were repeating if he arranged the elements in order of increasing atomic mass.

Mendeleev left spaces in his table, however. He knew that some elements belonged in certain groups based on properties. He predicted that elements would be discovered to fill the spaces. For example, he left spaces between zinc and arsenic, and indeed gallium and germanium were discovered in 1875 and 1886 with the properties he predicted.

In this example, prescriptive laws were discovered incompletely. Descriptive models helped to guide further discovery. Science is based on faith in an ordered physical realm.

Prescriptive and Descriptive Laws of Physics

yeah im not bored enough to get into it with a derp who doesnt even understand the basics of sound reasoning ~ have fun

You are accusing me of what you do.

The physical phenomenon that the laws of nature describe are prescriptive in nature. You don't have a choice in not breaking them.

Yes, I laughed at this as well - it reaffirmed that youre incapable of fundamental reasoning to draw conclusions.

Prescriptive vs descriptive doesnt speak to an ability to break the laws. And to "reason" that the laws are prescriptive, you invoked not being able to break them.

Whats the point of arguing with invalid reasoning? It's boring.

You don't need an excuse not to engage, GT.

 

[G.T.]

The Laws of Physics are descriptive, not prescriptive.

Science is the study of the handiwork of God.

As chemists began to discover elements in the late eighteenth century, they tried to organize them into tables. Dmitri Mendeleev, a Russian chemist and teacher, published his periodic table in 1869. He was working on a textbook for his students and trying to organize the 60 elements that were known. So he wrote the properties of the elements on cards and moved the cards around until he saw a pattern in the properties. It turns out that the properties were repeating if he arranged the elements in order of increasing atomic mass.

Mendeleev left spaces in his table, however. He knew that some elements belonged in certain groups based on properties. He predicted that elements would be discovered to fill the spaces. For example, he left spaces between zinc and arsenic, and indeed gallium and germanium were discovered in 1875 and 1886 with the properties he predicted.

In this example, prescriptive laws were discovered incompletely. Descriptive models helped to guide further discovery. Science is based on faith in an ordered physical realm.

Prescriptive and Descriptive Laws of Physics

yeah im not bored enough to get into it with a derp who doesnt even understand the basics of sound reasoning ~ have fun

You are accusing me of what you do.

The physical phenomenon that the laws of nature describe are prescriptive in nature. You don't have a choice in not breaking them.

Yes, I laughed at this as well - it reaffirmed that youre incapable of fundamental reasoning to draw conclusions.

Prescriptive vs descriptive doesnt speak to an ability to break the laws. And to "reason" that the laws are prescriptive, you invoked not being able to break them.

Whats the point of arguing with invalid reasoning? It's boring.

You don't need an excuse not to engage, GT.

No, just valid reasoning.

 

[ding]

Science is the study of the handiwork of God.

Prescriptive and Descriptive Laws of Physics

yeah im not bored enough to get into it with a derp who doesnt even understand the basics of sound reasoning ~ have fun

You are accusing me of what you do.

The physical phenomenon that the laws of nature describe are prescriptive in nature. You don't have a choice in not breaking them.

Yes, I laughed at this as well - it reaffirmed that youre incapable of fundamental reasoning to draw conclusions.

Prescriptive vs descriptive doesnt speak to an ability to break the laws. And to "reason" that the laws are prescriptive, you invoked not being able to break them.

Whats the point of arguing with invalid reasoning? It's boring.

You don't need an excuse not to engage, GT.

No, just valid reasoning.

So you say. Maybe you did need an excuse after all.

 

[ding]

The physical phenomenon that the laws of nature describe are prescriptive in nature. You don't have a choice in not breaking them.

 

[G.T.]

The physical phenomenon that the laws of nature describe are prescriptive in nature. You don't have a choice in not breaking them.

That makes no sense, dingbat. Anyone can break a prescription, unless its a law.

Prescription =/= unbreakable, thats not an argument.

 

[ding]

The physical phenomenon that the laws of nature describe are prescriptive in nature. You don't have a choice in not breaking them.

That makes no sense, dingbat. Anyone can break a prescription, unless its a law.

Prescription =/= unbreakable, thats not an argument.

Can you travel faster than the speed of light, GT?

 

[G.T.]

The physical phenomenon that the laws of nature describe are prescriptive in nature. You don't have a choice in not breaking them.

That makes no sense, dingbat. Anyone can break a prescription, unless its a law.

Prescription =/= unbreakable, thats not an argument.

Can you travel faster than the speed of light, GT?

Does prescription vs. description hinge on whether I can or not?

Leading questions dont make words have different meanings.

The nature of our laws being prescriptive or descriptive doesnt change whether or not you can break them.

Reasoning fail. Snoreeeee

 

[ding]

The physical phenomenon that the laws of nature describe are prescriptive in nature. You don't have a choice in not breaking them.

That makes no sense, dingbat. Anyone can break a prescription, unless its a law.

Prescription =/= unbreakable, thats not an argument.

Can you travel faster than the speed of light, GT?

Does prescription vs. description hinge on whether I can or not?

Leading questions dont make words have different meanings.

The nature of our laws being prescriptive or descriptive doesnt change whether or not you can break them.

Reasoning fail. Snoreeeee

Can you travel faster than the speed of light, GT?

 

[G.T.]

The physical phenomenon that the laws of nature describe are prescriptive in nature. You don't have a choice in not breaking them.

That makes no sense, dingbat. Anyone can break a prescription, unless its a law.

Prescription =/= unbreakable, thats not an argument.

Can you travel faster than the speed of light, GT?

Does prescription vs. description hinge on whether I can or not?

Leading questions dont make words have different meanings.

The nature of our laws being prescriptive or descriptive doesnt change whether or not you can break them.

Reasoning fail. Snoreeeee

Can you travel faster than the speed of light, GT?

I win.

Thank you. You may now revert to dingpeat after being destroyed.

 

[ding]

The physical phenomenon that the laws of nature describe are prescriptive in nature. You don't have a choice in not breaking them.

That makes no sense, dingbat. Anyone can break a prescription, unless its a law.

Prescription =/= unbreakable, thats not an argument.

Can you travel faster than the speed of light, GT?

Does prescription vs. description hinge on whether I can or not?

Leading questions dont make words have different meanings.

The nature of our laws being prescriptive or descriptive doesnt change whether or not you can break them.

Reasoning fail. Snoreeeee

Can you travel faster than the speed of light, GT?

I win.

Thank you. You may now revert to dingpeat after being destroyed.

Can you travel faster than the speed of light, GT?

 

[MaryL]

All states of being have cause.

What caused the initial state of existence?

The question implies the answer. that is: there wasn't a "beginning". I think it's that simple.

 

[ding]

The Laws of Physics are descriptive, not prescriptive.

The Laws of Physics are descriptive of the prescriptive Laws of Nature which is the actual physical phenomenon and not a numerical representation of it. The Laws of Nature prescribe what you can and cannot do do. For instance, the Laws of Nature prescribe that you, GT, cannot travel faster than the speed of light no matter what you do.