Why can’t we live in peace?

[charlieparker]

This is not really correct.

GR doesn’t really fail at any observed scale. We assume GR is incomplete because it is incompatible with the equally successful Standard Model of particle physics, but we haven’t yet made any observations that contradict either.

(In the strict philosophical sense no physics theory is ever ‘proven’ but in practice physicists do not feel the need to constantly re litigate the gas laws, or Maxwells equations. Or GR.)

There are a large number of observed phenomena that are consistent with a cosmological model that includes so-called Dark Matter. Which makes it quite a successful model.

It’s possible that you getting this confused with so called modified Newtonian gravity (MOND) which is a relatively fringe theory that only addresses galactic rotation velocity curves and not the other stuff that Dark Matter addresses. This proposes a modification to newton’s laws for extremely low accelerations.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sure. I was saying the same thing I think maybe in a more poorly worded fashion.

As you imply, many physicists believe that GR is incomplete or invalid in certain regimes and we need a Quantum theory of Gravity

But, I do think my framing is a bit more enlightening. We have cosmological models based on GR that *don't* fit the data without postulating the existence of dark matter which we haven't detected otherwise and which we only have candidate particles for.

Ergo, either GR is incorrect at cosmological scales which the MOND people would argue or there must be another type of matter which we haven't discovered yet.

P.S. I know you probably are deeper in this stuff than me, but that's my understanding.

[Tal_175]

When you reduce the belief system of others to something "childish", you cross the line into the world of the "unserious". It is arguably ad-hominem, which never moves the needle in a serious debate.

Calling something childish is not unserious. It describes some of the more outlandish aspects of religious metaphysics that demand high credulity, and suspension reality. It is an epistemic mode everyone is prone to under certain circumstances. Very smart people can hold believes that may came across as naive and childish to others. You can describe someone's utopian political believes as childish for example. It communicates how something appears to you in all seriousness.

I do not believe in the anthropomorphic, Abrahamic God of the Torah/Bible/Koran, but I do recognize the utility that religion plays, both for keeping society orderly and also for controlling the masses (arguably the two are the same thing). In the battle for souls by the Abrahamic religions, Christianity and Islam have done way better than Judaism for many reasons. One reason is that they are universal, you don't have to join a particular ethnic group (the Jews) to become a member of the faith, Another reason is that Christianity and Islam have included the pagan concepts of heaven and hell. Heaven is the carrot, live a moral life and you will be reunited with loved ones in paradise for eternity. This keeps family units together (in theory). Hell is the stick. Act badly and you spend eternity in unfathomable punishment. There is nothing childish about having a belief system that keeps society running well. The alternative is the modern free for all that America and Western Europe are now grappling with. No Gods and no rules. Gender becomes a choice rather than an immutable characteristic assigned by nature. Race becomes a social construct that doesn't actually exist, even as quotas are demanded on the basis of race. Hard work and thrift are discouraged with wealth redistribution while laziness is encouraged with social programs that demand little from the recipients of the aid.

What you are describing is a personal preference, not an objective value. Without getting into the politics and all, I personally much prefer living in one of the modern, progressive and secular Western (-ized) societies of today where people moan about trans people (or racial inequality) all day than the types of societies existed in the past or exist today in other parts of the world that are more closely based on religious doctrines where they have/had far more serious issues in the way I see them. But again that's just personal preference. I can't argue with your preferences.

[frabarmus]

[...] but I do recognize the utility that religion plays, both for keeping society orderly and also for controlling the masses (arguably the two are the same thing). [...] But i also respect people of faith who work hard and contribute to an orderly society.

+1. I eventually grew out of religion (see my other posts in this thread, #85 in particular) still I must acknowledge the important role religion has had, during my youth, in contributing towards generally making me a more considerate, caring (possibly even "less dangerous!!) person. It has taught me restraint and self discipline (among other things), helped comfort me in times of distress etc. I still think it's good as an instrument of education of children and young people and, for adults, It's not just dogma and bigotry, there are also significant historic, philosophical and mystical aspects that make it fascinating and the latter ones are those that got me interested in exploring other religious traditions, aswell, that were different from the one I was born into, which is catholicism. Currently, I suppose, the closest thing to a religion that I profess is music (and I don't even see myself as a particularly good practitioner of that, lol). Frank Zappa was quoted as saying: "Music is the only religion that delivers the goods!"

[DawgBone]

Another reason is that Christianity and Islam have included the pagan concepts of heaven and hell. Heaven is the carrot, live a moral life and you will be reunited with loved ones in paradise for eternity. This keeps family units together (in theory). Hell is the stick. Act badly and you spend eternity in unfathomable punishment. .

You cannot "good deed" your way into heaven and hell will be full of people who considered themselves good. Christ didn't come to call the righteous, but to call sinners to repentance.

[Kirk Garrett]

We went over this. An estimated 100-150 million people died as a result of wars fought in the 20th century, almost all of which were secular in nature and fought over land, resources, and political differences. A better case could be made for nationalism being the greatest source of conflict. Prior to that the mongols slaughtered the most people in the 13th century, mainly for riches and conquering for the sake of conquering. You're repeating talking points related to Islam's incursion into europe and european christians responding with counter attacks and incursions into the middle east but they are factually not the greatest source of death, misery, and suffering.

Careful, DawgBone, not everyone wants to hear facts.

It’s easier to make things up. Like “organized” religion is the real cause of wars and stuff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DawgBone]

Careful, DawgBone, not everyone wants to hear facts.

It’s easier to make things up. Like “organized” religion is the real cause of wars and stuff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well to be fair I do believe much of what falls under the umbrella of organized religion has caused quite a bit of harm to people but the same can be said for the modern thirst for secularism too. Any belief system taken to outward extremes in an attempt to sway others into it whether it's using social ridicule, political means, cultural exclusion, financial coercion, or outright force of arms is harmful.

[Stringswinger]

It is a fact that a lot of Christians have been killed by fellow Christians for not professing the right brand of Christianity. And Lots of non-Christians have been killed by Christians for refusing to follow Christianity.

At the same time, it is also a fact that people were killed in actual genocides for being Christians (Armenians and Assyrians).

Professing the wrong religion can be hazardous to one's heath, it seems.

[DawgBone]

It is a fact that a lot of Christians have been killed by fellow Christians for not professing the right brand of Christianity. And Lots of non-Christians have been killed by Christians for refusing to follow Christianity.

At the same time, it is also a fact that people were killed in actual genocides for being Christians (Armenians and Assyrians).

Professing the wrong religion can be hazardous to one's heath, it seems.

People are being killed and imprisoned for being Christian in China and Nigeria today.

[Stringswinger]

People are being killed and imprisoned for being Christian in China and Nigeria today.

Islamists and Communists do not play well with others.

[Kirk Garrett]

Well to be fair I do believe much of what falls under the umbrella of organized religion has caused quite a bit of harm to people but the same can be said for the modern thirst for secularism too. Any belief system taken to outward extremes in an attempt to sway others into it whether it's using social ridicule, political means, cultural exclusion, financial coercion, or outright force of arms is harmful.

I would say the cause of war is human beings. Everywhere you look all around the world and throughout history, humans cause harm to one another and to their environment.

[joe2758]

On a related note, can anyone point me to an example of Bach using the natural 6th within the minor context? I asked AI but it is a free one and keeps making up stuff.

I opened my complete solo lute works book and it was in the second beat of the first piece
bwv 995

[frabarmus]

I would say the cause of war is human beings. Everywhere you look all around the world and throughout history, humans cause harm to one another and to their environment.

And sometimes human beings "drag" God along their side into it (without asking him permission): Don't forget what was engraved into the belt buckle of nazi soldiers: "Gott mit uns!"

[Tal_175]

I opened my complete solo lute works book and it was in the second beat of the first piece
bwv 995

Thanks. Is the score in the public domain? I did a quick search and I only found descriptions of it.

[joe2758]

996 second measure, 997 8th measure, 999 measure 1, 1000 measure 6 so that's all the ones that start in a minor key

[DawgBone]

Islamists and Communists do not play well with others.

Well....radical islamists anyways. I have known muslims who aren't at all that way but it seems much of islam has been hijacked by extremist elements in recent decades. I guess what's at dispute is what constitutes true Islamic faith, because quite a few muslim countries allow Christians within their borders, though the specifics vary, nation to nation.

[joe2758]

Thanks. Is the score in the public domain? I did a quick search and I only found descriptions of it.

Not as far as I know, but I'd expect it is in nearly every minor piece

[Tal_175]

Not as far as I know, but I'd expect it is in nearly every minor piece

I am interested in how Bach used the natural 6th in a multipart context (Chorales for example). It could be in any voice, doesn't have to be soprano. Maybe I'll order a Bach chorales for guitar type of book.

[joe2758]

I am interested in how Bach used the natural 6th in a multipart context (Chorales for example). It could be in any voice, doesn't have to be soprano. Maybe I'll order a Bach chorales for guitar type of book.

Ah, my examples were two part examples (and by natural i am assuming you are referring to major 6th).

In that case you're most likely to see it as a non-harmonic tone like a passing tone etc.

As far as structural to the harmony I bet you could find something like (in A min:

ACF# to BDG# to CEA

but even then it will certainly always resolve up

[Aiq]

Careful, DawgBone, not everyone wants to hear facts.

It’s easier to make things up. Like “organized” religion is the real cause of wars and stuff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You both misrepresent my comment.

I was not taking a side in the Islam/Christian wars, I was relating that the Founding Fathers put separation of church and state in the Constitution (and lots of other documents, i.e. the Virginia Declaration of Religious Freedom and others across the colonies) because of the long precedent of religious motivation for dominance through war.

Hamilton, Madison, and Jay wrote extensively on the idea in the Federalist Papers; and yes, I support that Constitutional protection for there is more work to be done as there are many abuses in our country that violate the Separation clause, some committed by the current president.

[Stringswinger]

Well....radical islamists anyways. I have known muslims who aren't at all that way but it seems much of islam has been hijacked by extremist elements in recent decades. I guess what's at dispute is what constitutes true Islamic faith, because quite a few muslim countries allow Christians within their borders, though the specifics vary, nation to nation.

Back in my Attorney days, I had a bunch of Muslim clients who were very nice people. They were all from Pakistan and were in the convenience store business. I also had an even larger group of Hindu clients from India who were all in the motel business. If you do a good job for a member of an immigrant community, it seems they refer their fellow immigrants to you.

As nice as they all were, I always scheduled things to ensure that there were never folks from both groups in my waiting room at the same time. I remember having to explain all of that to my legal secretary. Most Americans are quite ignorant of the history of the Indian subcontinent and the partitions that created India, Pakistan and (after a time) Bangladesh.

[DawgBone]

You both misrepresent my comment.

I was not taking a side in the Islam/Christian wars, I was relating that the Founding Fathers put separation of church and state in the Constitution (and lots of other documents, i.e. the Virginia Declaration of Religious Freedom and others across the colonies) because of the long precedent of religious motivation for dominance through war.

Hamilton, Madison, and Jay wrote extensively on the idea in the Federalist Papers; and yes, I support that Constitutional protection for there is more work to be done as there are many abuses in our country that violate the Separation clause, some committed by the current president.

"Separation of church and state" isn't in the constitution. What the founders were trying to avoid was a government endorsement or sanctioning of one particular brand of Christianity such as you see in cases like the church of england.

[Mick-7]

We have cosmological models based on GR that *don't* fit the data without postulating the existence of dark matter which we haven't detected otherwise and which we only have candidate particles for. Ergo, either GR is incorrect at cosmological scales which the MOND people would argue or there must be another type of matter which we haven't discovered yet.

Rather than "cosmological" I think you mean the planck scale of reality: the quantum level and/or hyperdimensional realm. At that level, science deals in probabilities rather than actual events. If I've experienced extra sensory perception, I don't need science to prove to me that it exists.

[Stevebol]

Islam is like gangster rap. It appeals to the disadvantaged. Judaism is like jazz. Small by design and elite.
Christianity is the people in charge. They treat me well enough.

[Mick-7]

"Separation of church and state" isn't in the constitution.

Well, it's not explicit: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

[DawgBone]

Islam is like gangster rap. It appeals to the disadvantaged. Judaism is like jazz. Small by design and elite.
Christianity is the people in charge. They treat me well enough.

That's an interesting hot take you got there Stevie! Lol.