So is this further proof that God doesn't exist?
The opposite, it goes to show that there is design and order in the laws of nature and one step closer to a unified theory of nature. A design needs a designer, how could a big bang have created such design etc, surely it would be a disjointed mess if the rules were random.
The opposite, it goes to show that there is design and order in the laws of nature and one step closer to a unified theory of nature. A design needs a designer, how could a big bang have created such design etc, surely it would be a disjointed mess if the rules were random.
Ok I think I understand what gravitational waves are and I think I understand how they have detected them, but how do they come up with the conclusion that it was 2 black holes colliding 1.8 billion years ago?
The only people that should feel stupid, are the ones who believe every thing they are told is a fact.If this proves that Einstein was right all along he should sue anyone that calls it a theory from now on. Those people who have always claimed that he only had a "general theory" about stuff must feel pretty stupid now.
The opposite, it goes to show that there is design and order in the laws of nature and one step closer to a unified theory of nature. A design needs a designer, how could a big bang have created such design etc, surely it would be a disjointed mess if the rules were random.
The opposite, it goes to show that there is design and order in the laws of nature and one step closer to a unified theory of nature. A design needs a designer, how could a big bang have created such design etc, surely it would be a disjointed mess if the rules were random.
The universe only exists in its current form because of that relative order.
You then need to apply conditional probability.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conditional_probability
Interesting...........Muon I had a state education, can you explain conditional probability, imagine I am an intelligent 10-year-old. Go.
Tell more.
Interesting...........Muon I had a state education, can you explain conditional probability, imagine I am an intelligent 10-year-old. Go.
Tell more.
You are the result of the success of one sperm cell out of hundreds of millions. The likelihood of your entire glorious existence was incredibly small before conception, yet here you are. No one designed you, no one wrote the 'jpod instructions manual', you are the result of chance.
Observer selection
Data is filtered not only by study design and measurement, but by the necessary precondition that there has to be someone doing a study. In situations where the existence of the observer or the study is correlated with the data observation selection effects occur, and anthropic reasoning is required.[14]
An example is the past impact event record of Earth: if large impacts cause mass extinctions and ecological disruptions precluding the evolution of intelligent observers for long periods, no one will observe any evidence of large impacts in the recent past (since they would have prevented intelligent observers from evolving). Hence there is a potential bias in the impact record of Earth.[15] Astronomical existential risks might similarly be underestimated due to selection bias, and an anthropic correction has to be introduced.[16]