Re: [asa] plea for acronymical mercy

My layman's view on physics:

It is the theory there is an energy level (temperature) where the strong
force, weak force, gravity, and electromagnetic force are all one force.
After cooling the force breaks down into individual forces. So immediately
after the big bang there was one force and with expansion (inflation?) came
cooling, the four forces, and then eventually particles.

My guess is this is an over-simplification because it is an english
description of an idea that can only be expressed mathematically.

It is loosely related to TOE (Theory of Everything).

This all came up because I mentioned Grand Unifying Principle (GUP) which
is the idea that state science standards committees in the USA put in
curriculum standards. This idea says that evolution is a unifying concept
that explains everything from the formation of particles at the big bang to
cosmic evolution to chemical evolution (abiogenesis) to biological
evolution to social evolution - therefore they want to teach our children
that evolution explains everything. That "evolution" unifies all of
science.

This is EXACTLY what Gregory is complaining about. So, Ted, if you don't
believe in the grand unifying principle of evolution, well....... be aware
that your government is being subverted to teach something different
than what you believe. Once these standards are in place all teachers must
teach that concept or lose their jobs.

 My opinion is the "grand unifying principle of evolution" is a
fabrication. If that is true then we may possibly be seeing a
consitutionally problematic situation arise in the state science standards
committees. My question then becomes "whose side are the ASA members on,
anyway?" If one doesn't believe the fabrication is true, then why support
it rather than correct it? Do we want accurate science or not? Do we want
materialism taught as science? Is the fabrication scientism? Do we
politically support that? Every person must ask themselves that question.

Yes, materialists believe the fabrication is true. But do we? Gregory is
right on target with this.

Thanks,
Dave C

On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Murray Hogg <muzhogg@netspace.net.au>wrote:

> GUT = "Grand Unified Theory" - properly refers to theories in physics which
> unify the various forces into a single unified field. Used by analogy to
> refer to "meta-narrative"
>
>
> Cameron Wybrow wrote:
>
>> This is the second time in the last couple of days that I've seen the
>> abbreviation "GUT", without explanation. I've never seen this abbreviation
>> before. Could people please refrain from using it, unless they are going to
>> say what it means after the first usage?
>>
>> Cameron.
>>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Oct 30 11:51:10 2009