Re: Rate these theories
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But his list was grossly incomplete and therefore misleading. A more complete list would look like:
Thermodynamics
Quanmtum Mechanics
General Reltivity
Evolution
Quantum Electrodynamics
Electrity and Magnatism
Mechanics


[/ QUOTE ]

I certainly do not hope you think this list is in the correct order.

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you care what order I put them in? He simply said rate theories and not anything about the criteria. Although I was making a bit of a joke, but I think the order of those theories is just about correct. DONKS UNDERRATE THERMODYNAMICS!! I could make a good arguement for E and M or mechanics being higher, but I prefer my order.

P.S. I hate that I had 2 typos in one post much less one line.

Re: Rate these theories
 

"In terms of what? "


However you like. Scale of 1-10 is fine. On correctness is fine. Ability to make predections would work. Usefullness to science. Usefullness to religion. Belongness in science class. Personal beleif on correctness. How warm and fuzzy the words make you feel.

But mainly it's an argument against "Evolution is just a theory."

As a personal side note, I don't think that evolution and the bible are in conflict. But clearly gravity and the bible are. Jesus ascended to the heavens after he was resurected.

Re: Rate these theories
 

[ QUOTE ]

The moon is made of yellow cheese and moved by flying elves

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, this should be higher. go to this LINK and zoom all the way in.

Melch

Re: Rate these theories
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The moon is made of yellow cheese and moved by flying elves

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, this should be higher. go to this LINK and zoom all the way in.

Melch

[/ QUOTE ]

This is groundbreaking! Why have I not heard of these findings in the news?

Re: Rate these theories
 

[ QUOTE ]
DONKS UNDERRATE THERMODYNAMICS!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Please, thermodynamics can be derived from statistical mechanics, so I certainly wouldn't put it first on the list. Also, probably the most succesful theory to date, QED, below evolution must be a joke.

Re: Rate these theories
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
DONKS UNDERRATE THERMODYNAMICS!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Please, thermodynamics can be derived from statistical mechanics, so I certainly wouldn't put it first on the list. Also, probably the most succesful theory to date, QED, below evolution must be a joke.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now I see that you don't properply understand physics. Sure QED is accurate, but it is not a pretty theory which is why I put it so low. It is just like some machine that works well, but no one really understands why. You could put it above evolution if you like, but I think you would be making a mistake.

You seem to have the relationship between Statistical Mechanics and Thermodynamics backwards. Statistical Mechanics is generally thought to be okay because it agrees with Thermodynamics, not the other way around. Before QM statistical mechanics was a huge failure, because it never worked. Furthermore, Thermodynamics works much better as a theory then statistical mechanics would imply. Prove the second law from statistical mechanics some day. The second law of thermodynamcis is probably the deepest understanding of the universe that physics has ever accomplished. Statistical Mechanics suggests that violations of the second law are merely very improbable (it can be strictly shown in some circumstances). I believe that it will ultimately be shown to be impossible when these theories are put in the context of a full Non-Equilibrium theory. Statistical Mechanics is to Thermodynamics what ID is to evolution!! Untestable sophistry. Now I know you are a donk.

Some of this is over the top theatrics for entertainment purposes, so take it with a grain of salt. However, I am dead right about thermodynamics.

Re: Rate these theories
 

I venture to guess you never studied physics (at least not at university level).

The second law of thermodynamics CAN be derived using statistical mechanics, and in fact, it IS a statistical law (to say it represents our deepest understanding of the universe was a good one...it made me chuckle). Have you ever studied a particle ensemble with N (amount of particles) being small, using statistical mechanics? I would be stunned if you have.

Please read some good book about statistical mechanics before you're going to state nonsense (Equilibrium and non-equilibrium statistical thermodynamics, by M. Le Bellac would for instance be a good one).

Re: Rate these theories
 

I have a masters in physics and will soon have my Ph. D. from UIUC (the top graduate school in theoretical condensed matter physics). The point is that all experimental evidence supports thermodynamics. Thermodynamcis is a well tested and solid theory. There is no evidence for statistical mechanics except the fact that it gives thermodynamics (and you are wrong about the second law, it is only strictly derivable assuming no level crossings in QM during the process). You are putting the horse before the cart. Furthermore, Thermodynamics works well beyond the range of validity suggested by statistical mechanics (by several orders of magnitude no less). Ask any condensed matter experimentalist. I have graded for graduate statistical mechanics. I wager your entire understanding of physics is backwards. Next you are going to say something ridiculous like BCS is better than Ginzburg-Landau theory.

Re: Rate these theories
 

[ QUOTE ]
"In terms of what? "


However you like. Scale of 1-10 is fine. On correctness is fine. Ability to make predections would work. Usefullness to science. Usefullness to religion. Belongness in science class. Personal beleif on correctness. How warm and fuzzy the words make you feel.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK. Here goes:

Gravity: 5/9 (5 if you mean the theory of how gravity works... but 9, if you mean the "law" that describes what it is, and how to calculate the force)

Evolution: 8 (From what I've read, the theory of Evolution is extremely useful to Biological and Geological science.)

ID: 10/0 (Very useful to Creationists, meaningless to science.)

(PS: I notice most people are ranking these, instead of rating them...)

Re: Rate these theories
 

Good Point:

Gravity: B-
Evolution: C+
ID: Incomplete
ED: F-