eCosmology - Introduction To Quantum Mechanics Knowledge Base

Introduction To Quantum Mechanics Knowledge Base

Summarize the evidence that led to the introduction of quantum mechanics? Summarize the evidence that led to the introdution of quantum mechanics?

Most readable introduction to Quantum Mechanics? I'm looking for the most readable introduction to quantum mechanics. I don't mind the math; just give me something readable. Thanks!

Is The Young Einstein a good introduction to Quantum Mechanics for a Cow-gal?

What is a good source for an introduction to quantum physics? I am looking for a book that gives a comprehensive overview to the subject of quantum mechanics, including entanglement. Solid basic physics and understanding of calculus assumed.

how would you explain quantum tunneling to someone with little to no knowledge of quantum mechanics? I have to write a report for my research on spin filter tunneling. Since it's in a new field, the introduction has to be such that a high school student with limited knowledge of physics can understand. I know what quantum tunneling is but I just don't know how I can briefly explain it to someone who has no idea.

How accurate is this quantum computer magic 8-ball? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_8-Ball http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_quantum_mechanics ---------------------------- For a scientific modern day 'eight ball' that utilizes quantum computers: Visit http://globalbrainpaint.com/ Click on, 'real-time viewer' - then click on 'Enter a message on a future image' - and the image that pops up will express your feeling at the moment you made your question "official" - and you'll need to keep submitting messages until your initial message pops up on the screen... ...if you leave an especially long message... (I think you have about 55-70 characters max including spaces), the image that pops up will somehow answer your question [deciphering the image is all you] Cheers!

Do you think that these college courses are marketable? Physics (36 credits) General Physics: Mechanics General Physics: Electricity and Magnetism General Physics: Fluids and Thermal General Physics: Wave Motion and Quantum Introduction to Modern Physics Theoretical Mechanics Introduction to Quantum Mechanics I Intermediate Electricity and Magnetism I Topics in Contemporary Physics Solid State Physics I Thermal Physics Experimental Physics Electrical Engineering (21 credits) Introduction to Digital Systems (Computer Engineering) Circuits and Devices Continuous-Time Linear Systems Electronic Circuit Design Communications Systems I Principles and Applications of Lasers Mathematics (30 credits) Calculus with Analytical Geometry I Calculus with Analytical Geometry II Ordinary and Partial Differential Equations Matrices Calculus and Vector Analysis Advanced Calculus for Engineering and Science I Advanced Calculus for Engineering and Science II Mathematics of Algorithms* Concepts of Discrete Mathematics Mathematical Coding Theory Chemistry (8 credits) Chemical Principles I Experimental Chemistry I Chemical Principles II Experimental Chemistry II Computers (12 credits) Introduction to Programming Techniques* Programming for Engineers with C++ Introduction to Computer Architecture* Computer Organization and Design* and then I have my General Education courses. Do you think these courses will lead to a variety of job opportunities?

Quantum mechanics: Photon wave/particle duality in the "two slit" experiment: see below.? According to multiple sources (Hawking, Greene) the two slit experiment is the basis of quantum physics, as it presents a seeming paradox that is resolved by the introduction of wave/particle duality. To wit: if photons are fired at two open slits, the resulting pattern of where they "land" suggests wavelike interference, even if they are fired one at a time. Thinking about this anomoly gives rise to much of modern quantum physics. However, since according to general relativity, motion through time shrinks to zero at the speed of light, photons exist simultaneously at all points on their journey, and as such of course they interfere, the "impossibility" of the interference of temporally separated photons seems to be reduced to a simple problem of wave mechanics, eliminating the need for wave/particle duality int eh case of photons. Thus, the argument seems nonsensical to me, but I am a layman...can someone tell me what I'm missing? Thanks!

I need a solution manual? Does anyone have the solution manual for Introduction to quantum mechanics by David Griffith

Help with Griffiths QM!? Does anyone have a solution manual of Griffth's Introduction to Quantum Mechanics? :)

Do you understand that you are a combination of matter? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical ..ps if you wanna study the interactions at the sub-atomic level... ...read up on Quantum Mechanics; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_quantum_mechanics ...and so are computers? And the ability to fit a computer with an Artificial Intelligence will make it akin to a human being (in the future)? ...(do you understand) that as much as we are a combination of electrified matter, that more complex matter as a result of 'our' human hands will give birth to Artificial Intelligence... ...and asking why man needs to create Artificial Intelligence runs analogous to answering the question why we evolved a complex consciousness in the first place? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_biology example of synthetic biology and computing (for the sake of drawing comparison of the enhancing capabilities an A.I. would give us, along with the mammalian brain, reptilian motor cortex, fish/occipital brain that have evolved together for the sake of the human cerebral cortex and a future metallic appendage): http://www.scientificblogging.com/news_articles/e_coli_count_may_mean_future_synthetic_biology_computer "No, it won't. You can't create a robot capable of functioning like a human - you couldn't possibly mirror all of the reactions needed for real life by only using metallic compounds." If one downloaded all the data input-ed or amassed on the Internet into a robot...said robot fitted with an A.I. would be much more capable than the average human being. Also, there is such thing as 'synthetic biology;' My sister par took an internship at Davidson College where they created nano products mimicking complex computing capabilities... ...my apologies for that bit of trivia of what my sister did over the summer... ...but the synthetic biology and finding comparison between man-made biological structures versus metallic/silicon materials is an actively pursued science. As of now...the capabilities aren't their...but the ethical potential is. Everything begins with an introductory phase... And if the human brain evolved a metallic A.I. appendage, that A.I. appendage would be powered with--gasp--electricity. ...remember, the human brain is a collective evolution of the fish (occipital/spatial), mammal (higher order functioning aka cerebral cortex), and reptillian brain (motor). I dunno...they say a computer can't sense when it is undergoing system failure... ...but if a system failure is detected by encountering a break in the code, isn't that analogous to how a human being realizes their life is in danger via encountering observable environmental conditions that harm brain functionality?

Would you take Food Science [experiment-based] or Beyond Foundation Physics? Module Registration opens soon, I need opinions please. Here are the two modules, Food Science [biology] and Beyond Foundational Physics. Food Science is basically a module about how food is related to their daily life in terms of health, safety, environmental impacts and potential careers, through experiments [100%]. Beyond Foundational Physics is an Introduction to Quantum Mechanics, General Relativity, Particle Physics and Cosmology, but it's more theory-based and there's an exam. I'm more interested in the Physics, but it's quite likely we'll have to learn it at higher levels anyway, while with the bio we may not be able to. I can only choose either! I would like a few opinions, please.

writing string theory paper for school? Writing String theory paper for school.? And having trouble deciding what to include? I am doing it in English which is not my first language and I have never written a paper in English before. It has to be at least 15 pages. So far i have written an introduction (scientists attempting to unifying physics and that) then I explained general relativity and quantum mechanics (in about 3 and a half pages) and why we need to unify them. Should I write about the standard model? If so how much detail should I include? I have started writing about string theory itself, it's history and some basic suff before i get started on supersymmetry and that. I need help! Everything seems to random I'm not sure what to include and what not to and if there should be a summary anywhere. If someone could propose a very basic outline i would be very grateful.

What do you think of my schedule for College? all 4 years!? Hi, i am going to be Pre-Med. Major: Biophysics Minor: Chemistry, Biology, and Art History Is it too hard? Freshman Year: Fall: University Writing Calculus 1 General Chemistry w/ Lab Intro Biology w/ Lab Survey of Western Art I = 18 credits Spring: Drawing I (3) Calculus II General Chemistry II w/ Lab Intro Biology II w/ Lab Survey of Western Art II = 18 credits SUMMER: Political Science! Logic! @ Hunter College!!!!!!! Sophomore Year: Fall: University Physics I w/ lab (4) Multi-Variable Calculus (3) Organic Chemistry I w/ Lab (4) Molecular Biology (4) Ancient Art of the Bronze Age and Greece (AH 101) (3) = 18 credits Spring: University Physics II w/ lab (4) Statistics for the biological sciences (3) Organic Chemistry II w/ Lab (4) Cell Biology (3) Early Northern Renaissance Art and Architecture (3) = 17 credits SUMMER: Human Physiology! Genetics! @ NYU Junior Year: Fall: University Physics III (3) Biophysics: Macroscopic Physics in the Life Sciences (3) Intermediate Laboratory I: Techniques and Methods (3) Biochemistry (4) Physical Chemistry I (3) = 16 credits Spring: Biophysics: Microscopic Physics in the Life Sciences (3) Mechanics (3) Thermal and Statistical Physics (3) Physical Chemistry II (3) European Art of the Twentieth Century (AH 143) (3) = 15 credits Senior Year: Fall: Russian I (4) Undergraduate Research (3) Principles of Quantum Physics (3) Seminar in Medieval Art and Architecture (AH 119) (3) Engineering Analysis I (ApSc 113) (3) = 16 credits Spring: Russian II (4) Undergraduate Research (3) Engineering Analysis II (ApSc 114) (3) Electromagnetic Theory I (3) Introduction to Biomedical Computing (3) = 16 credits Its just a planning out. i was hoping for someone to help me change things around. Human Physiology, Genetics, and cell Biology, as well as Physical Chemistry aren't part of my major but, they will help me get a better understanding on the MCAT.

What do you think of my schedule for college! majoring in Biophysics!? Hi, i am going to be Pre-Med. Major: Biophysics Minor: Chemistry, Biology, and Art History Is it too hard? Freshman Year: Fall: University Writing Calculus 1 General Chemistry w/ Lab Intro Biology w/ Lab Survey of Western Art I = 18 credits Spring: Drawing I (3) Calculus II General Chemistry II w/ Lab Intro Biology II w/ Lab Survey of Western Art II = 18 credits SUMMER: Political Science! Logic! @ Hunter College!!!!!!! Sophomore Year: Fall: University Physics I w/ lab (4) Multi-Variable Calculus (3) Organic Chemistry I w/ Lab (4) Molecular Biology (4) Ancient Art of the Bronze Age and Greece (AH 101) (3) = 18 credits Spring: University Physics II w/ lab (4) Statistics for the biological sciences (3) Organic Chemistry II w/ Lab (4) Cell Biology (3) Early Northern Renaissance Art and Architecture (3) = 17 credits SUMMER: Human Physiology! Genetics! @ NYU Junior Year: Fall: University Physics III (3) Biophysics: Macroscopic Physics in the Life Sciences (3) Intermediate Laboratory I: Techniques and Methods (3) Biochemistry (4) Physical Chemistry I (3) = 16 credits Spring: Biophysics: Microscopic Physics in the Life Sciences (3) Mechanics (3) Thermal and Statistical Physics (3) Physical Chemistry II (3) European Art of the Twentieth Century (AH 143) (3) = 15 credits Senior Year: Fall: Russian I (4) Undergraduate Research (3) Principles of Quantum Physics (3) Seminar in Medieval Art and Architecture (AH 119) (3) Engineering Analysis I (ApSc 113) (3) = 16 credits Spring: Russian II (4) Undergraduate Research (3) Engineering Analysis II (ApSc 114) (3) Electromagnetic Theory I (3) Introduction to Biomedical Computing (3) = 16 credits Its just a planning out. i was hoping for someone to help me change things around. Human Physiology, Genetics, and cell Biology, as well as Physical Chemistry aren't part of my major but, they will help me get a better understanding on the MCAT.

where can I find the solution manual for Introduction to Quantum Mechanics 2nd Edition by David J. Griffiths? where can I find the solution manual for Introduction to Quantum Mechanics 2nd Edition by David J. Griffiths?

Where can I find a download link for the solutions manual to Introduction to Quantum Mechanics 2e by Griffiths? Where can I find a download link for the solutions manual to Quantum Mechanics (2nd Edition) by David J. Griffiths?

Einstein & God....does this sound like he believes in "God"? For all who said Einstein believed in God please read the following quotes, Einstein believed in higher power and higher knowledge....Albert Einstein Quotes on Philosophy of Religion, Theology, God The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description. If there is any religion that could cope with modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism. (Albert Einstein) It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. (Albert Einstein, 1954, The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press) Scientific research is based on the idea that everything that takes place is determined by laws of nature, and therefore this holds for the action of people. For this reason, a research scientist will hardly be inclined to believe that events could be influenced by a prayer, i.e. by a wish addressed to a Supernatural Being. (Albert Einstein, 1936, The Human Side. Responding to a child who wrote and asked if scientists pray.) A man's ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death. (Albert Einstein, "Religion and Science", New York Times Magazine, 9 November 1930) I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that survives his physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egoism, cherish such thoughts. I am satisfied with the mystery of the eternity of life and with the awareness and a glimpse of the marvelous structure of the existing world, together with the devoted striving to comprehend a portion, be it ever so tiny, of the Reason that manifests itself in nature. (Albert Einstein, The World as I See It) I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms. (Albert Einstein, Obituary in New York Times, 19 April 1955) I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings. (Albert Einstein, responding to Rabbi Herbert Goldstein who had sent Einstein a cablegram bluntly demanding "Do you believe in God?" Quoted from Victor J. Stenger, Has Science Found God? 2001, chapter 3.) One strength of the Communist system ... is that it has some of the characteristics of a religion and inspires the emotions of a religion. (Albert Einstein, Out Of My Later Years, 1950) http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quot... I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation. I cannot do this in spite of the fact that mechanistic causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern science. [He was speaking of Quantum Mechanics and the breaking down of determinism.] My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance -- but for us, not for God. (Albert Einstein,The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press) If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed. (Albert Einstein) The idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I am unable to take seriously. (Albert Einstein, Letter to Hoffman and Dukas, 1946) The foundation of morality should not be made dependent on myth nor tied to any authority lest doubt about the myth or about the legitimacy of the authority imperil the foundation of sound judgment and action. (Albert Einstein) I do not believe in immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it. (Albert Einstein, The Human Side) I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being. (Albert Einstein) What I see in Nature is a magnificent structure that we can comprehend only very imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of "humility." This is a genuinely religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism. (Albert Einstein) The mystical trend of our time, which shows itself particularly in the rampant growth of the so-called Theosophy and Spiritualism, is for me no more than a symptom of weakness and confusion. Since our inner experiences consist of reproductions, and combinations of sensory impressions, the concept of a soul without a body seem to me to be empty and devoid of meaning. (Albert Einstein) http://www.mega.nu:8080/atheist_quotes_1... Introduction - Albert Einstein Philosophy of Religion / Theology Quotes - Science vs. Religion - Einstein on Jews & Anti-Semitism - Top of Page Albert Einstein Theology- A human being is part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. We experience ourselves, our thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest. Albert Einstein on Science vs Religion Einstein observed that specialization is invariably damaging to Science as a whole; The area of scientific knowledge has been enormously extended, and theoretical knowledge has become vastly more profound in every department of science. But the assimilative power of the human intellect is and remains strictly limited. Hence it was inevitable that the activity of the individual investigator should be confined to a smaller and smaller section of human knowledge. Worse still, this specialization makes it increasingly difficult to keep even our general understanding of science as a whole, without which the true spirit of research is inevitably handicapped, in step with scientific progress. Every serious scientific worker is painfully conscious of this involuntary relegation to an ever-narrowing sphere of knowledge, which threatens to deprive the investigator of his broad horizon and degrades him to the level of a mechanic ... It is just as important to make knowledge live and to keep it alive as to solve specific problems. (Albert Einstein, 1954) Scientific research is based on the idea that everything that takes place is determined by laws of nature, and therefore this holds for the action of people. (Albert Einstein, 1954) The individual feels the futility of human desires and aims and the sublimity and marvelous order which reveal themselves both in nature and in the world of thought. Individual existence impresses him as a sort of prison and he wants to experience the universe as a single significant whole. The beginnings of cosmic religious feeling already appear at an early stage of development, e.g., in many of the Psalms of David and in some of the Prophets. Buddhism, as we have learned especially from the wonderful writings of Schopenhauer, contains a much stronger element of this. (Albert Einstein, 1930) The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description .. If there is any religion that could cope with modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism. (Albert Einstein) In my view, it is the most important function of art and science to awaken this religious feeling and keep it alive in those who are receptive to it. (Albert Einstein, 1930) Science has therefore been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death. (Albert Einstein, 1930) There is nothing divine about morality; it is a purely human affair. (Albert Einstein, 1934) For the scientific method can teach us nothing else beyond how facts are related to, and conditioned by, each other. The aspiration toward such objective knowledge belongs to the highest of which man is capable, and you will certainly not suspect me of wishing to belittle the achievements and the heroic efforts of man in this sphere. Yet is equally clear that knowledge of what is does not open the door directly to what should be. One can have the clearest and most complete knowledge of what is , and yet not be able to deduct from that what should be the goal of our human aspirations. Objective knowledge provides us with powerful instruments for the achievements of certain ends, but the ultimate goal itself and the longing to reach it must come from another source. And it is hardly necessary to argue for the view that our existence and our activity acquire meaning only by the setting up of such a goal and of corresponding values. (Albert Einstein, 1939) To make clear these fundamental ends and valuations, and to set them fast in the emotional life of the individual, seems to me precisely the most important function which religion has to perform in the social life of man. And if one asks whence derives the authority of such fundamental ends, since they cannot be stated and justified merely by reason, one can only answer: they exist in a healthy society as powerful traditions, which act upon the conduct and aspirations and judgments of the individuals; they are there, that is, as something living, without its being necessary to find justification for their existence. (Albert Einstein, 1939) .. free and responsible development of the individual, so that he may place his powers freely and gladly in the service of all mankind. There is no room in this for the divinization of a nation, of a class, let alone of an individual. Are we not all children of one father, as it is said in religious language? (Albert Einstein, 1939) If one holds these high principles clearly before one's eyes, and compares them with the life and spirit of our times, then it appears glaringly that civilized mankind finds itself at present in grave danger. In the totalitarian states it is the rulers themselves who strive actually to destroy that spirit of humanity. In less threatened parts it is nationalism and intolerance, as well as the oppression of the individuals by economic means, which threaten to choke these most precious traditions. (Einstein, 1954. p43-4) But if the longing for the achievement of the goal is powerfully alive within us, then shall we not lack the strength to find the means for reaching the goal and for translating it into deeds. (Albert Einstein, 1939) For science can only ascertain what is, but not what should be, and outside of its domain value judgments of all kinds remain necessary. Religion, on the other hand, deals only with evaluations of human thought and action: it cannot justifiably speak of facts and relationships between facts. According to this interpretation the well-known conflicts between religion and science in the past must all be ascribed to a misapprehension of the situation which has been described. For example, a conflict arises when a religious community insists on the absolute truthfulness of all statements recorded in the Bible. This means an intervention on the part of religion into the sphere of science; this is where the struggle of the Church against doctrines of Galileo and Darwin belongs. On the other hand, representatives of science have often made an attempt to arrive at fundamental judgments with respect to values and ends on the basis of scientific method, and in this way have set themselves in opposition to religion. These conflicts have all sprung from fatal errors. (Albert Einstein, 1941) But science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling, however, springs from the sphere of religion. To this there also belongs the faith in the possibility that the regulations valid for the world of existence are rational, that is, comprehensible to reason. I cannot conceive of a genuine scientist without that profound faith. The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. (Albert Einstein, 1941) Though I have asserted above that in truth a legitimate conflict between religion and science cannot exist, I must nevertheless qualify this assertion once again on an essential point, with reference to the actual content of historical religions. This qualification has to do with the concept of God. During the youthful period of mankind's spiritual evolution human fantasy created gods in man's own image, who, by the operations of their will were supposed to determine, or at any rate to influence, the phenomenal world. Man sought to alter the disposition of these gods in his own favour by means of magic and prayer. The idea of God in the religions taught at present is a sublimation of that old concept of the gods. Its anthropomorphic character is shown, for instance, by the fact that men appeal to the Divine Being in prayers and plead for the fulfillment of their wishes. Nobody, certainly, will deny that the idea of the existence of an omnipotent, just, and omni beneficent personal God is able to accord man solace, help, and guidance; also, by virtue of its simplicity it is accessible to the most undeveloped mind. But, on the other hand, there are decisive weaknesses attached to this idea in itself, which have been painfully felt since the beginning of history. (Albert Einstein, 1941) For a doctrine which is able to maintain itself not in clear light but only in the dark, will of necessity lose its effect on mankind, with incalculable harm to human progress. In their struggle for the ethical good, teachers of religion must have the stature to give up the doctrine of a personal God, that is, give up that source of fear and hope which in the past placed such vast power in the hands of priests. In their labours they will have to avail themselves of those forces which are capable of cultivating the Good, the True, and the Beautiful in humanity itself. This is, to be sure, a more difficult but an incomparably more worthy task. After religious teachers accomplish the refining process indicated they well surely recognise with joy that true religion has been ennobled and made more profound by scientific knowledge. If it is one of the goals of religion to liberate mankind as far as possible from the bondage of egocentric cravings, desires and fears, scientific reasoning can aid religion in yet another sense. Although it is true that it is the goal of science to discover rules which permit the association and foretelling of facts, this is not its only aim. It also seeks to reduce the connections discovered to the smallest possible number of mutually independent conceptual elements. (Albert Einstein, 1941) By way of the understanding he achieves a far-reaching emancipation from the shackles of personal hopes and desires, and thereby attains that humble attitude of mind toward the grandeur of reason incarnate in existence, and which, in its profoundest depths, is inaccessible to man. This attitude, however, appears to me to be religious, in the highest sense of the word. And so it seems to me that science not only purifies the religious impulse of the dross of its anthropomorphism but also contributes to a religious spiritualization of our understanding of life. The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge. (Albert Einstein, 1941) Religion and Science: Irreconcilable? As to science, we may well define it for our purpose as "methodical thinking directed toward finding regulative connections between our sensual experiences". (Albert Einstein, 1948) While it is true that science, to the extent of its grasp of causative connections, may reach important conclusions as to the compatibility and incompatibility of goals and evaluations, the independent and fundamental definitions regarding goals and values remain beyond science's reach. (Albert Einstein, 1948) Religion is concerned with man's attitude towards nature at large, with the establishing of ideals for the individual and communal life, and with human mutual relationship. These ideals religion attempts to attain by exerting an educational influence on tradition and through the development and promulgation of certain easily accessible thoughts and narratives (epics and myths) which are apt to influence evaluation and action along the lines of accepted ideals. It is this mythical, or rather symbolic, content of the religious traditions which is likely to come into conflict with science. This occurs whenever this religious stock of ideas contains dogmatically fixed statements on subjects which belong in the domain of science. (Albert Einstein, 1948) For the moral attitudes of a people that is supported by religion need always aim at preserving and promoting the sanity and vitality of the community and its individuals, since otherwise this community is bound to perish. A people that were to honour falsehood, defamation, fraud, and murder would be unable, indeed, to subsist for very long. (Albert Einstein, 1948) When considering the actual living conditions of present day civilised humanity from the standpoint of even the most elementary religious commands, one is bound to experience a feeling of deep and painful disappointment at what one sees. For while religion prescribes brotherly love in the relations among the individuals and groups, the actual spectacle more resembles a battlefield than an orchestra. Everywhere, in economic as well as in political life, the guiding principle is one of ruthless striving for success at the expense of one's fellow men. This competitive spirit prevails even in the school and, destroying all feelings of human fraternity and cooperation, conceives of achievement not as derived from the love for productive and thoughtful work, but as springing from personal ambition and fear of rejection. There are pessimists who hold that such a state of affairs is necessarily inherent in human nature; it is those who propound such views that are the enemies of true religion, for they imply thereby that the religious teachings are utopian ideals and are unsuited to afford guidance in human affairs. (Albert Einstein, 1948) Introduction - Albert Einstein Philosophy of Religion / Theology Quotes - Science vs. Religion - Einstein on Jews & Anti-Semitism - Top of Page Albert Einstein Theology- A human being is part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. We experience ourselves, our thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest. Albert Einstein on Jewish Religion Anti-Semitism and Academic Youth It is clear also that "serving God" was equated with "serving the living". The best of the Jewish people, especially the Prophets and Jesus, contended tirelessly for this. Judaism is thus no transcendental religion; it is concerned with life as we live it and as we can, to a certain extent, grasp it, and nothing else. It seems to me, therefore, doubtful whether it can be called a religion in the accepted sense of the word, particularly as no "faith" but the sanctification of life in a supra-personal sense is demanded of the Jew. But the Jewish tradition also contains something else, something which finds splendid expression in many of the Psalms, namely, a sort of intoxicated joy and amazement at the beauty and grandeur of this world, of which man can form just a faint notion. This joy is the feeling from which true scientific research draws its spiritual sustenance, but which also seems to find expression in the song of birds. To tack this feeling to the idea of God seems mere childish absurdity. (Albert Einstein, 1934) In this case, as in many mental disorders, the cure lies in a clear knowledge of one's condition and its causes. We must be conscious of our alien race and draw the logical conclusions from it. It is no use trying to convince the others of our spiritual and intellectual equality by arguments addressed to the reason, when the attitude of these others does not originate in their intellects at all. (Albert Einstein, 1934) Recommended reading: Albert Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, Crown Trade Paperback 1954

is information physical or metaphysical--eastern philosophy hints? we do everything in western world in a highly scientific manner, but somebody tell me that iching(if hold)(i know nothing iching which is the study of yin and yang, seems too mysterious) in china believe that information can go beyond physical, and metaphysical, also iching believe world(including the part in relativity and quantum physics)is highly determined, somebody told me that, if reason backward, things will be smaller and smaller and finally only one thing which is the start of everything, and common cause of everything(is that corresponding something in western physics), but quantum mechanic believe it is highly unpredictable, could anybody show me some brief introduction of iching

How many Athiest's feel they are smarter than Albert Einstein? Here is a list of mental Gladiators of faith. Thank God they never made the "A" list. Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543) Copernicus was the Polish astronomer who put forward the first mathematically based system of planets going around the sun. He attended various European universities, and became a Canon in the Catholic church in 1497. His new system was actually first presented in the Vatican gardens in 1533 before Pope Clement VII who approved, and urged Copernicus to publish it around this time. Copernicus was never under any threat of religious persecution - and was urged to publish both by Catholic Bishop Guise, Cardinal Schonberg, and the Protestant Professor George Rheticus. Copernicus referred sometimes to God in his works, and did not see his system as in conflict with the Bible. Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1627) Bacon was a philosopher who is known for establishing the scientific method of inquiry based on experimentation and inductive reasoning. In De Interpretatione Naturae Prooemium, Bacon established his goals as being the discovery of truth, service to his country, and service to the church. Although his work was based upon experimentation and reasoning, he rejected atheism as being the result of insufficient depth of philosophy, stating, "It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion; for while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them confederate, and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity." (Of Atheism) Johannes Kepler (1571-1630) Kepler was a brilliant mathematician and astronomer. He did early work on light, and established the laws of planetary motion about the sun. He also came close to reaching the Newtonian concept of universal gravity - well before Newton was born! His introduction of the idea of force in astronomy changed it radically in a modern direction. Kepler was an extremely sincere and pious Lutheran, whose works on astronomy contain writings about how space and the heavenly bodies represent the Trinity. Kepler suffered no persecution for his open avowal of the sun-centered system, and, indeed, was allowed as a Protestant to stay in Catholic Graz as a Professor (1595-1600) when other Protestants had been expelled! Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) Galileo is often remembered for his conflict with the Roman Catholic Church. His controversial work on the solar system was published in 1633. It had no proofs of a sun-centered system (Galileo's telescope discoveries did not indicate a moving earth) and his one "proof" based upon the tides was invalid. It ignored the correct elliptical orbits of planets published twenty five years earlier by Kepler. Since his work finished by putting the Pope's favorite argument in the mouth of the simpleton in the dialogue, the Pope (an old friend of Galileo's) was very offended. After the "trial" and being forbidden to teach the sun-centered system, Galileo did his most useful theoretical work, which was on dynamics. Galileo expressly said that the Bible cannot err, and saw his system as an alternate interpretation of the biblical texts. Rene Descartes (1596-1650) Descartes was a French mathematician, scientist and philosopher who has been called the father of modern philosophy. His school studies made him dissatisfied with previous philosophy: He had a deep religious faith as a Roman Catholic, which he retained to his dying day, along with a resolute, passionate desire to discover the truth. At the age of 24 he had a dream, and felt the vocational call to seek to bring knowledge together in one system of thought. His system began by asking what could be known if all else were doubted - suggesting the famous "I think therefore I am". Actually, it is often forgotten that the next step for Descartes was to establish the near certainty of the existence of God - for only if God both exists and would not want us to be deceived by our experiences - can we trust our senses and logical thought processes. God is, therefore, central to his whole philosophy. What he really wanted to see was that his philosophy be adopted as standard Roman Catholic teaching. Rene Descartes and Francis Bacon (1561-1626) are generally regarded as the key figures in the development of scientific methodology. Both had systems in which God was important, and both seem more devout than the average for their era. Isaac Newton (1642-1727) In optics, mechanics, and mathematics, Newton was a figure of undisputed genius and innovation. In all his science (including chemistry) he saw mathematics and numbers as central. What is less well known is that he was devoutly religious and saw numbers as involved in understanding God's plan for history from the Bible. He did a considerable work on biblical numerology, and, though aspects of his beliefs were not orthodox, he thought theology was very important. In his system of physics, God is essential to the nature and absoluteness of space. In Principia he stated, "The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion on an intelligent and powerful Being." Robert Boyle (1791-1867) One of the founders and key early members of the Royal Society, Boyle gave his name to "Boyle's Law" for gases, and also wrote an important work on chemistry. Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "By his will he endowed a series of Boyle lectures, or sermons, which still continue, 'for proving the Christian religion against notorious infidels...' As a devout Protestant, Boyle took a special interest in promoting the Christian religion abroad, giving money to translate and publish the New Testament into Irish and Turkish. In 1690 he developed his theological views in The Christian Virtuoso, which he wrote to show that the study of nature was a central religious duty." Boyle wrote against atheists in his day (the notion that atheism is a modern invention is a myth), and was clearly much more devoutly Christian than the average in his era. Michael Faraday (1791-1867) Michael Faraday was the son of a blacksmith who became one of the greatest scientists of the 19th century. His work on electricity and magnetism not only revolutionized physics, but led to much of our lifestyles today, which depends on them (including computers and telephone lines and, so, web sites). Faraday was a devoutly Christian member of the Sandemanians, which significantly influenced him and strongly affected the way in which he approached and interpreted nature. Originating from Presbyterians, the Sandemanians rejected the idea of state churches, and tried to go back to a New Testament type of Christianity. Gregor Mendel (1822-1884) Mendel was the first to lay the mathematical foundations of genetics, in what came to be called "Mendelianism". He began his research in 1856 (three years before Darwin published his Origin of Species) in the garden of the Monastery in which he was a monk. Mendel was elected Abbot of his Monastery in 1868. His work remained comparatively unknown until the turn of the century, when a new generation of botanists began finding similar results and "rediscovered" him (though their ideas were not identical to his). An interesting point is that the 1860's was notable for formation of the X-Club, which was dedicated to lessening religious influences and propagating an image of "conflict" between science and religion. One sympathizer was Darwin's cousin Francis Galton, whose scientific interest was in genetics (a proponent of eugenics - selective breeding among humans to "improve" the stock). He was writing how the "priestly mind" was not conducive to science while, at around the same time, an Austrian monk was making the breakthrough in genetics. The rediscovery of the work of Mendel came too late to affect Galton's contribution. William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907) Kelvin was foremost among the small group of British scientists who helped to lay the foundations of modern physics. His work covered many areas of physics, and he was said to have more letters after his name than anyone else in the Commonwealth, since he received numerous honorary degrees from European Universities, which recognized the value of his work. He was a very committed Christian, who was certainly more religious than the average for his era. Interestingly, his fellow physicists George Gabriel Stokes (1819-1903) and James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879) were also men of deep Christian commitment, in an era when many were nominal, apathetic, or anti-Christian. The Encyclopedia Britannica says "Maxwell is regarded by most modern physicists as the scientist of the 19th century who had the greatest influence on 20th century physics; he is ranked with Sir Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein for the fundamental nature of his contributions." Lord Kelvin was an Old Earth creationist, who estimated the Earth's age to be somewhere between 20 million and 100 million years, with an upper limit at 500 million years based on cooling rates (a low estimate due to his lack of knowledge about radiogenic heating). Max Planck (1858-1947) Planck made many contributions to physics, but is best known for quantum theory, which revolutionized our understanding of the atomic and sub-atomic worlds. In his 1937 lecture "Religion and Naturwissenschaft," Planck expressed the view that God is everywhere present, and held that "the holiness of the unintelligible Godhead is conveyed by the holiness of symbols." Atheists, he thought, attach too much importance to what are merely symbols. Planck was a churchwarden from 1920 until his death, and believed in an almighty, all-knowing, beneficent God (though not necessarily a personal one). Both science and religion wage a "tireless battle against skepticism and dogmatism, against unbelief and superstition" with the goal "toward God!" Albert Einstein (1879-1955) Einstein is probably the best known and most highly revered scientist of the twentieth century, and is associated with major revolutions in our thinking about time, gravity, and the conversion of matter to energy (E=mc2). Although never coming to belief in a personal God, he recognized the impossibility of a non-created universe. The Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "Firmly denying atheism, Einstein expressed a belief in "Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of what exists." This actually motivated his interest in science, as he once remarked to a young physicist: "I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details." Einstein's famous epithet on the "uncertainty principle" was "God does not play dice" - and to him this was a real statement about a God in whom he believed. A famous saying of his was "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." I know I spelled Atheist's wrong, thorry!

What do you think of these scientists and their belief of God? Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543) Copernicus was the Polish astronomer who put forward the first mathematically based system of planets going around the sun. He attended various European universities, and became a Canon in the Catholic church in 1497. His new system was actually first presented in the Vatican gardens in 1533 before Pope Clement VII who approved, and urged Copernicus to publish it around this time. Copernicus was never under any threat of religious persecution - and was urged to publish both by Catholic Bishop Guise, Cardinal Schonberg, and the Protestant Professor George Rheticus. Copernicus referred sometimes to God in his works, and did not see his system as in conflict with the Bible. Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1627) Bacon was a philosopher who is known for establishing the scientific method of inquiry based on experimentation and inductive reasoning. In De Interpretatione Naturae Prooemium, Bacon established his goals as being the discovery of truth, service to his country, and service to the church. Although his work was based upon experimentation and reasoning, he rejected atheism as being the result of insufficient depth of philosophy, stating, "It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion; for while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them confederate, and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity." (Of Atheism) Johannes Kepler (1571-1630) Kepler was a brilliant mathematician and astronomer. He did early work on light, and established the laws of planetary motion about the sun. He also came close to reaching the Newtonian concept of universal gravity - well before Newton was born! His introduction of the idea of force in astronomy changed it radically in a modern direction. Kepler was an extremely sincere and pious Lutheran, whose works on astronomy contain writings about how space and the heavenly bodies represent the Trinity. Kepler suffered no persecution for his open avowal of the sun-centered system, and, indeed, was allowed as a Protestant to stay in Catholic Graz as a Professor (1595-1600) when other Protestants had been expelled! Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) Galileo is often remembered for his conflict with the Roman Catholic Church. His controversial work on the solar system was published in 1633. It had no proofs of a sun-centered system (Galileo's telescope discoveries did not indicate a moving earth) and his one "proof" based upon the tides was invalid. It ignored the correct elliptical orbits of planets published twenty five years earlier by Kepler. Since his work finished by putting the Pope's favorite argument in the mouth of the simpleton in the dialogue, the Pope (an old friend of Galileo's) was very offended. After the "trial" and being forbidden to teach the sun-centered system, Galileo did his most useful theoretical work, which was on dynamics. Galileo expressly said that the Bible cannot err, and saw his system as an alternate interpretation of the biblical texts. Rene Descartes (1596-1650) Descartes was a French mathematician, scientist and philosopher who has been called the father of modern philosophy. His school studies made him dissatisfied with previous philosophy: He had a deep religious faith as a Roman Catholic, which he retained to his dying day, along with a resolute, passionate desire to discover the truth. At the age of 24 he had a dream, and felt the vocational call to seek to bring knowledge together in one system of thought. His system began by asking what could be known if all else were doubted - suggesting the famous "I think therefore I am". Actually, it is often forgotten that the next step for Descartes was to establish the near certainty of the existence of God - for only if God both exists and would not want us to be deceived by our experiences - can we trust our senses and logical thought processes. God is, therefore, central to his whole philosophy. What he really wanted to see was that his philosophy be adopted as standard Roman Catholic teaching. Rene Descartes and Francis Bacon (1561-1626) are generally regarded as the key figures in the development of scientific methodology. Both had systems in which God was important, and both seem more devout than the average for their era. Isaac Newton (1642-1727) In optics, mechanics, and mathematics, Newton was a figure of undisputed genius and innovation. In all his science (including chemistry) he saw mathematics and numbers as central. What is less well known is that he was devoutly religious and saw numbers as involved in understanding God's plan for history from the Bible. He did a considerable work on biblical numerology, and, though aspects of his beliefs were not orthodox, he thought theology was very important. In his system of physics, God is essential to the nature and absoluteness of space. In Principia he stated, "The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion on an intelligent and powerful Being." Robert Boyle (1791-1867) One of the founders and key early members of the Royal Society, Boyle gave his name to "Boyle's Law" for gases, and also wrote an important work on chemistry. Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "By his will he endowed a series of Boyle lectures, or sermons, which still continue, 'for proving the Christian religion against notorious infidels...' As a devout Protestant, Boyle took a special interest in promoting the Christian religion abroad, giving money to translate and publish the New Testament into Irish and Turkish. In 1690 he developed his theological views in The Christian Virtuoso, which he wrote to show that the study of nature was a central religious duty." Boyle wrote against atheists in his day (the notion that atheism is a modern invention is a myth), and was clearly much more devoutly Christian than the average in his era. Michael Faraday (1791-1867) Michael Faraday was the son of a blacksmith who became one of the greatest scientists of the 19th century. His work on electricity and magnetism not only revolutionized physics, but led to much of our lifestyles today, which depends on them (including computers and telephone lines and, so, web sites). Faraday was a devoutly Christian member of the Sandemanians, which significantly influenced him and strongly affected the way in which he approached and interpreted nature. Originating from Presbyterians, the Sandemanians rejected the idea of state churches, and tried to go back to a New Testament type of Christianity. Gregor Mendel (1822-1884) Mendel was the first to lay the mathematical foundations of genetics, in what came to be called "Mendelianism". He began his research in 1856 (three years before Darwin published his Origin of Species) in the garden of the Monastery in which he was a monk. Mendel was elected Abbot of his Monastery in 1868. His work remained comparatively unknown until the turn of the century, when a new generation of botanists began finding similar results and "rediscovered" him (though their ideas were not identical to his). An interesting point is that the 1860's was notable for formation of the X-Club, which was dedicated to lessening religious influences and propagating an image of "conflict" between science and religion. One sympathizer was Darwin's cousin Francis Galton, whose scientific interest was in genetics (a proponent of eugenics - selective breeding among humans to "improve" the stock). He was writing how the "priestly mind" was not conducive to science while, at around the same time, an Austrian monk was making the breakthrough in genetics. The rediscovery of the work of Mendel came too late to affect Galton's contribution. William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907) Kelvin was foremost among the small group of British scientists who helped to lay the foundations of modern physics. His work covered many areas of physics, and he was said to have more letters after his name than anyone else in the Commonwealth, since he received numerous honorary degrees from European Universities, which recognized the value of his work. He was a very committed Christian, who was certainly more religious than the average for his era. Interestingly, his fellow physicists George Gabriel Stokes (1819-1903) and James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879) were also men of deep Christian commitment, in an era when many were nominal, apathetic, or anti-Christian. The Encyclopedia Britannica says "Maxwell is regarded by most modern physicists as the scientist of the 19th century who had the greatest influence on 20th century physics; he is ranked with Sir Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein for the fundamental nature of his contributions." Lord Kelvin was an Old Earth creationist, who estimated the Earth's age to be somewhere between 20 million and 100 million years, with an upper limit at 500 million years based on cooling rates (a low estimate due to his lack of knowledge about radiogenic heating). Max Planck (1858-1947) Planck made many contributions to physics, but is best known for quantum theory, which revolutionized our understanding of the atomic and sub-atomic worlds. In his 1937 lecture "Religion and Naturwissenschaft," Planck expressed the view that God is everywhere present, and held that "the holiness of the unintelligible Godhead is conveyed by the holiness of symbols." Atheists, he thought, attach too much importance to what are merely symbols. Planck was a churchwarden from 1920 until his death, and believed in an almighty, all-knowing, beneficent God (though not necessarily a personal one). Both science and religion wage a "tireless battle against skepticism and dogmatism, against unbelief and superstition" with the goal "toward God!" Albert Einstein (1879-1955) Einstein is probably the best known and most highly revered scientist of the twentieth century, and is associated with major revolutions in our thinking about time, gravity, and the conversion of matter to energy (E=mc2). Although never coming to belief in a personal God, he recognized the impossibility of a non-created universe. The Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "Firmly denying atheism, Einstein expressed a belief in "Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of what exists." This actually motivated his interest in science, as he once remarked to a young physicist: "I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details." Einstein's famous epithet on the "uncertainty principle" was "God does not play dice" - and to him this was a real statement about a God in whom he believed. A famous saying of his was "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Johnny I'm just making a point not all scientist are non believers some do have a different logic other than science. Who are you to judge my intelligence? http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencefaith.html I'm not saying you have to believe honestly I could care less what your beliefs are There are endless possibilities... http://www.allaboutcreation.org/scientists-who-believe-in-god-faq.htm