Thought that might be it.

Returning to the above, so, what about John Nash's "zero sum"? Does that play into any of this?

To entropy? No, game theory is strictly about human behavior, and Nash's equilibrium can only be adopted as a behavioral strategy under a strict set of circumstances.

I read the link.
The second law of thermodynamics only applies to closed systems.
It's very hard to find closed systems in our universe.
Some even belive that our universe is part of a multiverse.
The WMAP image suggest that there is a birth mark on it from the time our universe was connected to an other universe.

Related data? The 2nd law would probably rule even without universal expansion. But the expansion makes the disorder from order faster.

"I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ..." :)

If you still believe that life violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics then I can only conclude that we have different ideas of what that law states.

How can we have different ideas of what that law states?
I know that the 2nd law will win in the end eventually.
I think it's very strange though that we can discuss it and even come to some conclusions.

Strange indeed, though you appear to suggest that life has some means to delay the onset of increasing entropy, there is nothing in the 2nd law as I understand it that permits a delaying mechanism to exist. Thus we have a different idea of what the law states.

Could it be that atoms organizing into a life form, and then our attempts to organize our lives into schedules and tidy homes are what he thinks delays entropy? Could it be that our efforts simply speed up entropy elsewhere in the universe? In other words, is there a rate at which entropy is supposed to occur? Is it a constant or an average? If it is an average, then increasing organization in one locality would lead to decreasing organization in another neighborhood. Maybe?

That's what the link I provided earlier was intended to show. I was told the linked page was read and afterwards the "life violates the 2nd law" claim remained.

In the meantime, I didn't read the link.
One might be surprised at how little science I had to take at the Bachelor's degree level.
So, since it's been so many years since I had Physics, I could only look at it mathematically and then ask "is there a rate and, if so, a constant or an average?"

The 2nd law doesn't say anything about rate.
Only that heat cannot spontaneously flow from a colder location to a hotter location.
Problems With Entropy As Disorder.
http://www.science20.com/train_thought/blog/entropy_not_disorder-75081
And where does God fit in all this?
Nowhere of course. He is not needed.

@es99
"the old Intelligent Design argument about life breaking the law of Entropy thus proving the existence of a Designer."
How can that prove the existence of a Designer?
Thats even more weird...

Thought that might be it.

Returning to the above, so, what about John Nash's "zero sum"? Does that play into any of this?

I am not familiar with that, although I have heard of it. Are you suggesting that religious belief could fall under the auspices of Game Theory?

Quite the opposite. That the universe plays a zero sum game.

Thought that might be it.

Returning to the above, so, what about John Nash's "zero sum"? Does that play into any of this?

I am not familiar with that, although I have heard of it. Are you suggesting that religious belief could fall under the auspices of Game Theory?

Quite the opposite. That the universe plays a zero sum game.

That's very true.
And here is the article again that started my thinking:)
Physicists 'PROVE' God DIDN'T create the Universe
http://www.express.co.uk/news/science/612340/Origin-of-the-universe-riddle-solved-by-Canadian-physicists-and-er-it-wasn-t-God

Einstein: "God doesn't play dice with the universe."
Bohr: "Einstein, don't tell God what to do."

Thought that might be it.

Returning to the above, so, what about John Nash's "zero sum"? Does that play into any of this?

I am not familiar with that, although I have heard of it. Are you suggesting that religious belief could fall under the auspices of Game Theory?

Quite the opposite. That the universe plays a zero sum game.

Could be a problem zero sum game .

Once was the Big Bang and then the Big Crunch over & over & over again Zero sum game

Now it's Big Bang , Big Freeze = Nothing ?

---

Einstein: "God doesn't play dice with the universe."
Bohr: "Einstein, don't tell God what to do."

God is the dice.

---

"the old Intelligent Design argument about life breaking the law of Entropy thus proving the existence of a Designer."
How can that prove the existence of a Designer?
Thats even more weird...

Well consider the source of ID, they are quite weird.

---

Einstein: "God doesn't play dice with the universe."
Bohr: "Einstein, don't tell God what to do."

God is the dice.

Yes. And the holy number is seven.

Einstein: "God doesn't play dice with the universe."
Bohr: "Einstein, don't tell God what to do."

God is the dice.
Yes. And the holy number is seven.

Off cause it is , I play with a dice like this "pentagonal" :-)

---

I have a question for the believers. Is God a NY Mets fan or a KC Royals fan? During the recent league championship baseball series on numerous occasions I saw a player making the sign of praising God after throwing a strike for the last out of an inning, and a player making the same gesture after swinging his bat and hitting a homerun and they were on different teams. You can substitute your own favorite game and players and the scene is essentially the same. Players thanking God for their success of the moment. In most cases I believe the player was sincere in his/her belief that God gave him/her the advantage. So, just whose side is God on. This can also be found in warfare, both sides thinking God is on their side to the point of sanctioning the killing and carnage. These are primitive actions and yet they persist here and now in the 21st century. When are people going to wake up and realise that a real God would not show such favoritism.

God is on the side of all of humanity.

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

God is on the side of all of humanity

...and Peter Pan loves all children.
Fairy tales are full of wonder.

One must believe in those 'fairy tales', especially in the hard times we are living in these days. Wouldn't it be easier for all humankind if all adults would still think like children? Straightforwardness, honesty and innocence would conquer words like war, hatred and jealousy.

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

297902 Do you know anything about the Budda's teachings ....??

So you believe in nothing . Even thou nothing does not exist

---

God is on the side of all of humanity

...and Peter Pan loves all children.
Fairy tales are full of wonder.

One must believe in those 'fairy tales', especially in the hard times we are living in these days. Wouldn't it be easier for all humankind if all adults would still think like children? Straightforwardness, honesty and innocence would conquer words like war, hatred and jealousy.

One might take comfort/refuge in fairy tales, for a time, but they solve no problems.
There is no evidence for the existence of GOD, and too much of humanity's energy is wasted pretending that GOD is real.

In my opinion too much of humanity's energy is wasted in fighting each other due to ignorance and lack of knowledge.

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

One might take comfort/refuge in fairy tales, for a time, but they solve no problems.

Actually it does solve problems. Religion is community building, and through community building you either prevent or solve a lot of rather fundamental problems.

One might take comfort/refuge in fairy tales, for a time, but they solve no problems.

Actually it does solve problems. Religion is community building, and through community building you either prevent or solve a lot of rather fundamental problems.

So what is religion can build communities? It's not the only means we have to perform this function, some of which don't require acceptance of fairy tales before admission (for instance, sports teams can do the same thing).

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

So what is religion can build communities? It's not the only means we have to perform this function, some of which don't require acceptance of fairy tales before admission (for instance, sports teams can do the same thing).

Most do actually. To join the community of being a fan of a sports team requires you to accept the fable that your sports team is the most awesome at the sport they are doing, even though in nearly all cases that is objectively not true.

But granted, yes, sports teams do perform this function. That said, they have only been able to effectively do this function since the advent of mass media, since that has expanded the reach of sports teams towards a wider world and a larger audience. And even then, religion is far more successful at getting to people.

But granted, yes, sports teams do perform this function. That said, they have only been able to effectively do this function since the advent of mass media, since that has expanded the reach of sports teams towards a wider world and a larger audience. And even then, religion is far more successful at getting to people.

Football (soccer) supporters have almost a religious belief in the game outside the US.
But that has nothing to do with mass media coverage.
Football is religion and Zlatan is our savior.
To the aesthete football is an art form, to an athletic ballet. To the spiritually inclined it is a religion. - Paul Gardner
To some it's like chess.
Rätt jyst asså, says our Bajen super fans.
Da Bears:)


Not only sports. Music as well.
Do you remember that John Lennon said "We're more popular than Jesus now"

So what is religion can build communities? It's not the only means we have to perform this function, some of which don't require acceptance of fairy tales before admission (for instance, sports teams can do the same thing).

Most do actually. To join the community of being a fan of a sports team requires you to accept the fable that your sports team is the most awesome at the sport they are doing, even though in nearly all cases that is objectively not true.

But granted, yes, sports teams do perform this function. That said, they have only been able to effectively do this function since the advent of mass media, since that has expanded the reach of sports teams towards a wider world and a larger audience. And even then, religion is far more successful at getting to people.

Agree...

bobby has to accept that people are different, and have different needs to belong to a community.

When and where have I indicated that I don't accept this?

All 'needs' may turn disastrous.

Both Secular (Marxism and Nazism), and All Religious.

Sorry what? In what world is secular limited to the adherents of marxism or nazism?

Secular has no moral 'High Ground' over Religious.

In your view, others may have a different opinion. Are they wrong, and if so, why?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

So what is religion can build communities? It's not the only means we have to perform this function, some of which don't require acceptance of fairy tales before admission (for instance, sports teams can do the same thing).

Most do actually. To join the community of being a fan of a sports team requires you to accept the fable that your sports team is the most awesome at the sport they are doing, even though in nearly all cases that is objectively not true.

But granted, yes, sports teams do perform this function. That said, they have only been able to effectively do this function since the advent of mass media, since that has expanded the reach of sports teams towards a wider world and a larger audience. And even then, religion is far more successful at getting to people.

Agree...

bobby has to accept that people are different, and have different needs to belong to a community.

When and where have I indicated that I don't accept this?

All 'needs' may turn disastrous.

Both Secular (Marxism and Nazism), and All Religious.

Sorry what? In what world is secular limited to the adherents of marxism or nazism?

Secular has no moral 'High Ground' over Religious.

In your view, others may have a different opinion. Are they wrong, and if so, why?

bobby...

Marxist, Nazi, Progressives, are all the same.

These self righteous BGH (Better - Greatest - Humans) types have no moral superiority over the similar self-righteous religious believers.

They all have, and if allowed, always will, inflict human slaughter and enslavement upon humanity. A the religious have done.

Yes. I do understand the BGH religious. As I understand the non-religious BGH people. Both do believe in their superiority.

bobby...

You are not one of them. Are you?

I have no idea whether you consider me one of their number. Can you provide some answers to the questions that were asked?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Bobby...

#1 - This started with my questions. Which you, and others, still refuse to answer.

#2 - I do understand your technique of diverting from Inconvenient Questions. Ain't gonna work.

#3 - What were your original answers?

#4 - I do apologize to others monitoring this Important Issue. It is just that bobby, and his ilk. Have always had success in the small intellectual world they inhabit. By diverting attention from the silliness of their arguments.

His posts do confirm what I am saying.

bobby...

Do we finally end your charade. By saying: We agree, to disagree.

Ok?

I'm sure you know what you mean by inconvenient questions, it's hard for me to guess which ones you are referring to, and thus indicate whether and where I have provided an answer.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...