Is There Any Evidence That As Science Give Suitable Explanation For Natural Phenomena Encountered, The Lure Of Religion Will Gradually Diminish?

[willbewhatiwill]

Church attendances are down in many western countries but is this the case for other religions?

Phenomena can be scientifically explained, proved & verified, without having to invoke explanations that involve the spiritual world. Invoking the name of God on complex issues (as in the dark ages) can hinder the seeking of explanations & solutions from a scientific & logical standpoint to pressing issues.

[jim360]

I think you might need to read into Dark Matter a little more.

In practice we don't know what it is, of course, but to say that it's "not subatomic particles" because of a link you posted that had literally nothing to say on the subject seems extraordinary.

[jim360]

Also, did that article just call protons "elementary particles"?

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/facebook/000/010/692/19789999.jpg

[willbewhatiwill]

Jim360: "Proton would have about the same mass as it does even if the Higgs boson didn't exist".

Higgs boson particle gives mass to PROTONS (of the atomic nucleus) but not to light particle (PHOTONS). I did not plagiarise as paragraph 1,2,4 are more own composition.

[jim360]

No. The Higgs boson gives mass to bare quarks, but that's not enough to account for the entire mass of the proton. The up quark and down quark bare masses total about 10 MeV (ie, about 1% of the proton mass; with some deal of uncertainty, because no-one has ever observed a lone up quark). The remainder is accounted for because the proton is a bound state (ie not elementary, the second major error in the article you posted), and binding energy due to the Strong force (governed by gluons, not the Higgs boson) creates the remaining 95%+ of the proton mass.

[willbewhatiwill]

ToraToraTora,

In science explanations by someone (quoted in references) can be opened for discussion, such explanations are not plagiarised but discussed.

[Garaman]

Why do people believe in a god anyway? Presumably not through personal experience, but either because they can't understand some things so allocate them to a god, or because they have read a book and believe it. So yes, as there are more things being explained you would expect fewer to believe in a god, but there will always be some who believe what they read in books.

Many of those who say they believe in god can't really anyway or they would lead much better lives, and be kinder to others. Unless of course they believe that their god rewards nasty people in the afterlife, but perhaps they just aren't very bright.

[ToraToraTora]

Now you are arguing about nuclear physics with jim! PMSL!" I'm not bad but I know that jim works in physics and is more knowledgable in this area.

[willbewhatiwill]

Jim360,
Don't criticise what the links says, You don't even appear to know that Protons and Neutrons each contains 3 types of quarks. (The are 6 types of quarks in total). Check out:
http://www.schoolphysics.co.uk/age16-19/Nuclear%20physics/Nuclear%20structure/text/Quarks_/index.html

[jim360]

willbe. As TTT points out, I am a physicist by profession currently. In fact it's particle physics, rather than nuclear physics, that I work on.

I'll leave it to you how you respond to this, but let's put it this way: I don't get my understanding of particle physics from popular science articles that (unintentionally, I'm sure) tend to distort the truth.

[Zacs-Master]

(This should be good).

[jim360]

Let me just make another point: in your first article, it called the proton an elementary particle. I pointed out this was wrong (because it is). You suggest that I not criticise the article, but your second link pointedly reveals that the proton is made up of quarks. That means it's not an elementary particle, in direct contradiction to your first link. Are you sure you understand your links, if you cannot see this point?

The proton and neutron in fact contains all types of quark, and antiquark, although all but the two up and one down quarks are "sea" quarks -- as in, they appear at random, eg due to the Uncertainty Principle, before disappearing again just as quickly, but are still important to understand the structure of the particle.

[willbewhatiwill]

Jim360,

Are you saying that the mass of the protons are not due to the 3 quarks but to the Strong force (governed by gluons, not the Higgs boson) which creates the remaining 95%+ of the proton mass? If this is true where are the references to this fundamental point?

[willbewhatiwill]

jim360,

I know Protons and Neutrons are each made up of various types of quarks.

Yes, protons may be more appropriately called Subatomic paritacle, not elementary particle.

[jim360]

Yes, that's what I'm saying. I'll try to find a better reference than the following, but it will make the point for now:

http://axelmaas.blogspot.ch/2011/10/mass-from-strong-force.html

[Old_Geezer]

Well Garaman, IMO the first reason one believes in a God is the apparent need for a first cause of everything. Whatever that cause is, one can label it "God" and discuss what form God takes and how one can be later. So by definition (provided you believe in cause and effect) a God of some type does exist.

Once that has been established it was a simple step to think that such a God might be aware and have an influence over it's creation. Perhaps even judging it's worthiness. It's not an awful supposition especially when you have no other evidence.

Naturally some ideas, held/pushed by influential individuals and groups gain popularity over time, or are enforced by the powerful, until a culture accepts them as true.

Since much of a religion's doctrine will involve morality, and issues outside of the physical realm we live in: clarification of the physical isn't going to change a lot. At most it will encourage acceptance that a God is not frequently intervening in day to day life as was once supposed. But so what ?

Believing in a God isn't going to change who you are. If you can't find the enthusiasm to be a saint, you still won't be, because you can't play act something you are not, at all times, all your life. Most would stress themselves out. One hopes for a God that is understanding of it's creations and the flaws they have.

[jim360]

https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/9410274.pdf

This, for example. If you search for "proton mass lattice QCD" then you'll find quite a few articles or discussions, all of which indirectly make the point that to know what the proton mass is, you need to do QCD (ie Strong) interactions; the Higgs boson only comes into it *very* indirectly, although it does give the up and down quark slightly different masses.

[Khandro]

Is this paranormal or para nonsense?
https://www.thoughtco.com/is-the-ouija-board-dangerous-2593140?utm_campaign=wilat&utm_medium=email&utm_source=cn_nl&utm_content=10313952&utm_term=

[willbewhatiwill]

Khandro,

I certainly do not consider mere using Ouija Board as paranormal phenomena.

[jim360]

Well, now that we've cleared up the various misunderstandings about elementary particle physics, it does allow me the opportunity to raise another point: how easy it is for misconceptions about scientific endeavour to arise, when even its advocates don't understand the science properly.

[dannyk13]

Jim, especially when cutting and pasting is involved.