Comments on: Michio Kaku on God http://www.kirstensanford.com/2009/04/30/michio-kaku-on-god/ The world according to a hula hooping, TKD black-belt wearing, radio show producing physiologist with aspirations to science journalism Tue, 22 May 2012 04:04:55 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1 By: Mike http://www.kirstensanford.com/2009/04/30/michio-kaku-on-god/#comment-14769 Mike Thu, 07 Jan 2010 00:51:34 +0000 http://www.kirstensanford.com/2009/04/30/michio-kaku-on-god/#comment-14769 Hmmmm, maybe... At the most fundamental level everything is static. This static then splits itself infinitely (Why? How? It just does...I don't know, that's the mystery of it all). The split then makes possible this dynamic universe in which very diverse experiences are possible. The point being, at the most fundamental scientific level everything is exactly the same. There is no reason to oppose or hurt anyone or anything. Yah? No? Maybe? Who knows. Sounds crazy to me. Hmmmm, maybe…

At the most fundamental level everything is static. This static then splits itself infinitely (Why? How? It just does…I don’t know, that’s the mystery of it all). The split then makes possible this dynamic universe in which very diverse experiences are possible.

The point being, at the most fundamental scientific level everything is exactly the same. There is no reason to oppose or hurt anyone or anything.

Yah? No? Maybe? Who knows. Sounds crazy to me.

]]> By: Mike Magee http://www.kirstensanford.com/2009/04/30/michio-kaku-on-god/#comment-12811 Mike Magee Sat, 07 Nov 2009 13:29:44 +0000 http://www.kirstensanford.com/2009/04/30/michio-kaku-on-god/#comment-12811 Good morning Dr. Sandford, I struggle with Dr. Kaku's assertion that he has defined who God is. You both discussed that you can easily place theories on small pieces of paper; I will not pretend to fully understand the theories. I do understand that theories are theories and they must be tested, and in most cases, are incomplete. I don’t have a theory; I just look around and see completeness. Everything in nature works and works perfectly. I stand back and look in awe of the complex workings involved in the smallest systems. After we fill our brains with knowledge and achieve high status in the science community, is it okay to just believe without a tried and tested law? Thanks for listening, Mike Magee Good morning Dr. Sandford,
I struggle with Dr. Kaku’s assertion that he has defined who God is. You both discussed that you can easily place theories on small pieces of paper; I will not pretend to fully understand the theories. I do understand that theories are theories and they must be tested, and in most cases, are incomplete. I don’t have a theory; I just look around and see completeness. Everything in nature works and works perfectly. I stand back and look in awe of the complex workings involved in the smallest systems.
After we fill our brains with knowledge and achieve high status in the science community, is it okay to just believe without a tried and tested law?
Thanks for listening, Mike Magee

]]> By: Successful Researcher: How to Become One http://www.kirstensanford.com/2009/04/30/michio-kaku-on-god/#comment-7109 Successful Researcher: How to Become One Thu, 21 May 2009 21:34:31 +0000 http://www.kirstensanford.com/2009/04/30/michio-kaku-on-god/#comment-7109 Thanks for sharing the link! Thanks for sharing the link!

]]> By: Aj http://www.kirstensanford.com/2009/04/30/michio-kaku-on-god/#comment-6546 Aj Sat, 09 May 2009 00:35:52 +0000 http://www.kirstensanford.com/2009/04/30/michio-kaku-on-god/#comment-6546 Spiritual I can accept as separated from superstition, although no definition is ever settled on. Using the word 'god' to mean order not a supreme consciouness is a bad idea, but I get it. Souls? You have lost me there. Spiritual I can accept as separated from superstition, although no definition is ever settled on. Using the word ‘god’ to mean order not a supreme consciouness is a bad idea, but I get it. Souls? You have lost me there.

]]>