Those who discount all that is not scientifically proven - by inference- discount the need for scientific investigation. Scientific research is about investigating and proving (or disproving) that which is as yet unproven. Many in society (and we all belong to this category from time to time) fail to make the distinction between "scientifically disproved" and "unproven". We discard the possibility of the existence of things, phenomena and processes, simply because they have not yet been proven to exist through scientific investigation.
For example, the possibility of time travel is discounted by many simply because science hasn't achieved it as yet. But even if we never succeed in finding a way to achieve Time Travel (or anything else, currently unachievable) through modern science and technology, does that necessarily mean that it is truly impossible? Today, we take for granted, things which a mere century or two ago, our ancestors would have scoffed at if it had been suggested as a possibility to them. I'm thinking of test tube babies, intercontinental flight, real-time video calls between people in different parts of the world, breaking the sound barrier, walking on the moon, microwave ovens, the internet (on which I'm writing this), etc., etc.
Similarly, we often accept as fact, things which are as yet, unproven, purely because "everyone else" accepts it. Columbus was considered mad by even his own shipmates in his belief that one couldn't "fall off the edge of the Earth [or sea]". Until a few short decades ago, it was an accepted "fact" that the atom was the smallest particle of an element and couldn't be split into smaller particles.
Those who discount religion and the existence of God on the basis that - somehow - Science dispels the notion of God, should, perhaps, consider the Laws of Thermodynamics which are universally accepted as part of the fundamental laws of Physics by Scientists the world over. The first Law implies that energy cannot be created or destroyed (only converted from one form to another). The second implies that one cannot convert energy without producing heat (i.e. all work produces heat). The third law states that all systems move towards states of increasing entropy (i.e chaos) unless influenced from outside the system. This would mean that the world [universe] we live in would inevitably descend into chaos unless influenced from "outside the system". Could that mean that the we are all doomed to universal chaos unless there is someone / force / phenomenon outside our world / universe [system] who cares to bring us to order? Or in other words - does that mean that we are [our world /universe] is doomed if God doesn't happen to exist in some form or another??
By the way, I don't claim to have proved (or disproved) anything here - just raised a few questions and confused a few people, hopefully! ;-)
No comments:
Post a Comment