Sunday, July 14, 2013

Atheism Dilemma V

As you read the uneducated tweets above from so-called "atheists," did you notice the trend?  They all mention "reality."

Atheists often bring up the word in an attempt to mock believers by claiming that they (atheists) hold the true perception of reality, while believers live in a "fantasy" world.  To them, Christians are "delusional." They worship a "fictitious being" a "sky fairy," while the atheist is in the "real world" made of material that can be perceived by the senses and examined via the scientific method.

There is a big dilemma here that these atheists above and all others have:

Reality is not what they think it is.

The world we perceive, the universe we see and send satellites and telescopes to study is not as it seems.  The water you shower in, the food you eat, the people you hug and kiss; each are not what they seem.  What do I mean by this?

Well, we all are made up of atoms. Atoms are mostly empty space with a nucleus in the middle which is very small.  Think of it as a stadium representing an atom and a baseball in the middle representing the nucleus.  This is how an atom basically is structured.

The shell of the atom is created by electrons spinning around the atom protecting it with an electromagnetic field, just like a stadium has a circular wall.  Without this electromagnetic field, atoms would touch each other and will annihilate one another.  In other words, everything that we know to exist would explode instantly if we did not have these electrons generating this field and preventing the atoms from touching.

Here is where it gets even more weird.

We are not Solid and Touch is an illusion:

Since we are mostly space, how come we don't pass through each other like "ghosts?"  Why are we "solid?" Well the answer is simple and mind blowing at the same time.  We are not solid. Solidity is an illusion.  What we perceive as solid are the electromagnetic fields repelling one another.  In other words, when atoms bump into each other via the electromagnetic field, that "bump" is caused by the repulsion or the coulomb repulsion. This repulsion is what we perceive as "solid" or touch. Depending how strong the force around the atom is determines whether or not the material we are "touching" is hard or soft, liquid or gas, etc.  The field around liquid or softer material is weaken, so this is why our fingers can enter easily in water and why we can crumble snow in our hands.  The field around metal or a rock is stronger, this is why we cannot easily press into them.

Think of it as having two magnets with differ poles.  When you try to put the magnets together, they repel each other. You can feel something pushing both magnets apart or away from each other.  This same force is what we perceive every time we "touch" something. However, in reality, we are NOT touching anything, just like the two magnets are not "touching." We are perceiving the force around atoms. Each electron releases a differ charge and these charges tell our senses what it is we are "touching."  Our brains are pretty much left to figure out on its own what it is we are actually perceiving, nothing is exact.

The Lying Brain

As a matter of fact, when you touch your nose you seem to feel your finger touching your nose and your nose touching your finger right?  Wrong! There is actually a difference between the time it takes for a signal from your finger to reach your brain and the time it takes for a signal from the skin on your nose to reach the brain. Since the nose is closer the brain, the signal reaches the brain almost instantly.

However, when pertaining to your finger and the brain, the signal takes longer.  So how is it that we don't notice the delay in sensation?  Well, our brains lie to us!  Our brains compensate for the time difference by telling us that both signals are coming in at the same time allowing us to perceive that the nose and finger are touching at the same time.  

Moreover, if you are sitting right now, you really are not. You are actually hovering over the chair one Angstrom or 10 ^-8 centimeters. Your rear end seems to be touching the chair, but it is not. What you "feel" is the repulsion of the electrons that make up the chair and the electrons that make up your clothing and buttocks.

Here comes the scary part.

We have a lonely existence:

We basically are trapped in a field of electrons and live a lonely existence never touching anything.  You may think that you are touching things, but in fact you never are. A hug from mom and dad feels great; or perhaps, that first kiss from your significant other, well, it never happened in the way you think it did.  You have never touched them.

That "great sex" you think you had was just an illusion - a bunch of forces repelling each other.  All you perceived are force fields which your brain told you were "hugs" or "kisses." All we have are fields and our brains telling us what it thinks those fields are.  This is what we call "reality."


Reality is pretty much what the brain tells us it thinks it is.  We have to have faith in this information and trust it to be in fact, "reality."  For all we know, we could be just a brain in a vat, or hooked up to a computer which feeds us "reality" like in the movie, "The Matrix."

We can never know for sure what "reality" is.  An atheist tweeted above that, "our senses are limited but our understanding of reality is far better thanks to science..." well there is a problem with this. Science is subject to our senses.  It is not independent of nature nor is it a conscious entity that bypasses nature. Science is processed via our senses.  We "touch" and "taste" samples, "smell" them, we "see" through microscopes or telescopes, we "hear" sounds and try to figure them out.

See the problem here?

All this information is processed via our senses and in the brain.  So this atheist's claim that "our understanding of reality is far better thanks to science" is not correct.

Star Trek's "holodeck" which gives the illusion of reality using force fields
Next time an atheist tells you that you believe in "fairy tales" or that they are the sole dwellers of"reality," remind them this physics lesson.

Physics in a way confirms "Solipsism" or the philosophical idea that our brains are all that exist and that "reality" is what the mind makes of it.

In "reality" (no pun intended), atheists live in a "fairy tale" of the mind along with everyone else.  The "reality" they are so fond of is really a bunch of electromagnetic fields in empty space repelling each other leaving the brain to interpret what each field is while at the same time giving the illusion that things are solid.

This begs the question: does reality really exist, or is it an illusion?

For all we know it could be a computer simulation like in the Star Trek "holodeck" where force fields are charged in a specific way in order to give the appearance of different kinds of matter. This is basically what "reality" is - a bunch of force fields structured in distinct ways in order to present what we perceive as "reality."  

Any atheist that cites "reality" in an attempt to discredit faith does not understand science.  The tweets above demonstrate the scientific illiteracy of atheists who speak without knowing.
Claiming to be "in reality" and that believers rely on "blind faith" is a false dichotomy.  The truth of the matter is that the atheist him/herself is relying on "blind faith" when perceiving and accepting what he/she thinks is reality.  Here lies another dilemma in atheism.  

These are actual atoms. Notice they do not touch.



  1. You had the basic thing about things not actually "toucing" down but pretty much everything else was way off the mark.

    Especially the part about electrons protecting atoms from touching each others (actually electrons pull other nucleus towards them) and those nucleus annihilating each other.

    Also the "force around atoms" has absolutely nothing to do with how hard or "liquidy" we feel things as. The "brain is lying" thing is also off. The signal does reach at different times and if the time difference wouldn't be as tiny (a couple of milliseconds) we would be able to sense it. It's not lying, we simply can't make out the difference similarly to how we can't see really tiny things without tools to help us.

    The whole thing about "you've never really touched someone/something" seems to boil down to you redefining the meaning of "touch".

    1. No, your understanding is off. Electrons do protect the atoms as there generate a field around them. This is taught by every physics professor on Earth and can be found in any physics text. Electrons provide the charges necessary for our nervous system to interpret what it is we are perceiving. Any change in charge or loss of electrons alters the structure of the atom which in turn changes our perception of it. Our brains lie to us daily. Try it, do the "blind spot" test. Try this one here Blind Spot. In this test, a letter "disappears." However, the letter did not disappear. It is our brain that is deceiving us. No physicist believes as you do. We never touch anything at all. It is a scary but true fact of life.

  2. ben December 7, 2013 at 7:18 PM

    I know I'm sorta necroing this post from ages ago- but what ever.
    Your concept of quantum mechanics isn't QUITE right.
    The blind spot doesn't have anything to do with QM. It's because the nerve in the back of our eye doesn't have receptors on it. Our brain fills in the gap with guestimations and information from the other eye. You know that, but you are suggesting for some reason that it has something to do with anything other than basic biology. Why?
    The concept of 'never touching one another' is sorta silly. Sure, our electrons aren't bumping nastys... but what does that have to do with anything other than a basic semantic redefinition of the word 'touch'. You're redefining a word to try and sound philosophical, it's silly and beneath you!
    Things wouldn't explode without electrons. Where would the energy come from to cause this 'explosion'? The neutrons and protons of the nucleus wouldn't be particularly fond of one another of course.. the reason electrons jumping to other atoms causes energy release is because the electron has less energy in a lower state of the new atom. If you magically remove the electron with magic you are taking away energy from the system.
    I suppose if you argue that through use of this magic that electrons energy has to go somewhere so it explodes.. but... we're talking magic here, not science (for a hypothetical thought experiment, so it's ok.)
    So, what would happen if you took a handful of protons and a handful of neutrons and put them in the same cup?
    Well, that's sorta a bizarre question that I;ve never really thought about since it isn't really realistic in the real world.
    However, ini neutron stars the gravity is so strong that it pushes electrons and protons together to form neutrons. The entire city sized star is composed entirely of neutrons. In the process of squishing and combining the electrons and protons lots of energy is released, but that wouldn't happen in a one atmosphere vessel.
    Free neutrons without a nucleus decay via beta decay radioactively, which is VERY hazardus to the health of anyone standing nearby. Lots of gamma rays, but no booms. no annihilation. I don't know if it would beta decay in the presence of protons though. I imagine it would.
    Lastly your concept of molecular structure is somewhat confused. Snow falls through your fingers because it is made up of small bits of frozen water crystallized with air.
    Liquid water flows through your fingers because the MOLECULES (not atoms) of H2O have enough energy that they are spread out enough that your fingers can slide them around one another and slip through.
    Things are solid because the molecules or atoms are very close together and have strong bonds. Heat that something up and the atoms/molecules spread out- letting your fingers slide through. Not really changing much about the ionic properties. the electrons don't give two cents. Till you heat it into a plasma, but we aren't going there! :)


  3. REPLY:
    Ben, I had to edit your comment a bit due to profanity. First, you are falling into a strawman argument. I never said that the blind spot has anything to do with quantum mechanics. The words 'blind spot' is not even in the post. I am assuming that you are referring to a comment made where I mentioned it in regards to how the brain "lies" to us. In your very comment you expound on this, thanks! The concept of atoms never touching is important indeed. It deals with the metaphysical question of what is reality. This post is a direct response to the atheist's suggestion that people who believe in God do not understand reality. I explain how reality is not really what atheists believe it to be. No science can truly explicate what reality is. There is nothing silly about this for it has been in question since man has learned how to philosophize and study empirically by using physics. This is how we have the discipline of 'metaphysics.' Man has always questioned what he is, where he is, what is IS, etc Again, there is nothing silly about this and just shows you have never studied philosophy or even physics. This is one of my favorite disciplines in general because it forces us to think hard and start from scratch, so to speak. We can't just live on this Earth without thinking what we are and what everything really is. In my other post regarding the universe being a program, I provide a link to a study showing that it is probable that our universe is indeed a program on a computer. I find that extremely fascinating. If this is proven to be 100%, then this would completely destroy atheism because it would prove that there is indeed someone higher than us who maintains us in some sort of a simulation.

    In regards to atoms, it is well known that atoms will annihilate one another if they touch. This is pretty much what takes place in an atomic explosion. Energy is always present, but in different forms. The energy doesn't come from anywhere, it merely changes. I'm not sure where you got magic from, but your understanding of how particles work is a bit off. All physicists understand energy to be constant. Energy doesn't magically appear in time, space and matter. It is always present, but in various forms. In regards to your question on protons and neutrons, both would most likely become cohesive depending on the charges. The question is not bizarre because this exists in nuclei. I think you are mixing astrophysics with general physics and this is why you are confused.

    The latter part of your post deals with the perception of atoms by our nervous system and not the actual particles themselves and how they are charged. Matter is perceived as solid, liquid, gas or plasma based on the charges in atoms which in turn effect how molecules form and behave. Our brain is left to interpret these charges and process them.


Thank you for reading and for your comment. All comments are subject to approval. They must be free of vulgarity, ad hominem and must be relevant to the blog posting subject matter.


Catholic Church (789) God (410) Jesus (350) Atheism (344) Bible (322) Jesus Christ (289) Pope Francis (237) Atheist (229) Liturgy of the Word (197) Science (157) LGBT (147) Christianity (139) Gay (82) Pope Benedict XVI (81) Rosa Rubicondior (79) Abortion (76) Prayer (66) President Obama (57) Liturgy (56) Physics (53) Philosophy (52) Vatican (51) Christian (50) Blessed Virgin Mary (47) Christmas (43) New York City (43) Psychology (43) Holy Eucharist (38) Women (35) Politics (34) Biology (32) Baseball (31) Supreme Court (31) NYPD (27) Religious Freedom (27) Traditionalists (24) priests (24) Health (23) Space (23) Pope John Paul II (22) Racism (22) Theology (21) Evil (20) First Amendment (20) Apologetics (19) Death (19) Pro Abortion (19) Protestant (19) Astrophysics (18) Christ (18) Child Abuse (17) Donald Trump (17) Evangelization (17) Illegal Immigrants (17) Pro Choice (17) Police (16) Priesthood (16) Pedophilia (15) Marriage (14) Vatican II (14) Divine Mercy (12) Blog (11) Eucharist (11) Gospel (11) Autism (10) Jewish (10) Morality (10) Muslims (10) Poverty (10) September 11 (10) Cognitive Psychology (9) Easter Sunday (9) Gender Theory (9) Holy Trinity (9) academia (9) CUNY (8) Human Rights (8) Pentecostals (8) Personhood (8) Sacraments (8) Big Bang Theory (7) Condoms (7) David Viviano (7) Ellif_dwulfe (7) Evidence (7) Hispanics (7) Spiritual Life (7) Barack Obama (6) Hell (6) Humanism (6) NY Yankees (6) Babies (5) Cyber Bullying (5) Gender Dysphoria Disorder (5) Massimo Pigliucci (5) Podcast (5) Pope Pius XII (5) The Walking Dead (5) Angels (4) Donations (4) Ephebophilia (4) Pope Paul VI (4) Catholic Bloggers (3) Death penalty (3) Evangelicals (3) Founding Fathers (3) Pluto (3) Pope John XXIII (3) Baby Jesus (2) Dan Arel (2) Eastern Orthodox (2) Encyclical (2) Freeatheism (2) Oxfam (2) Penn Jillette (2) Pew Research Center (2) Plenary Indulgence (2) Cursillo (1) Dan Savage (1) Divine Providence (1) Fear The Walking Dead (1) Pentecostales (1)