Paul

It's not the religion that I am interested in, it's the religious people and the amusing things they say.

Finally, someone who gets it.

And atoms are constantly vibrating and jostling around, they are not sitting still they are animated.

If you think the word animated only applies to living things than why do we call cartoons animated?

Cartoons are certainly not alive, are they?

I'm not sure.

Everything we know is about our way of being alive, what we call biology, but there may be more than one way to be alive.

Have you ever seen the movie The Andromeda Strain?

I think it's okay for the mods to know so long as they never reveal the reporters username or other information.

The identity of the reporter should never be made public.

Like I said, you may interpret animated in any way you like.

You could even interpret it as saying the entire universe is alive.

Animated in the sense of movement, activity, vibrating, kinetic, energetic, bouncing, moving, jiggling, but you may interpret it in any way you like.

It's called quantum fluctuations, but that's not all there is in empty space. Empty space is also entirely occupied by the Higgs field.

I'm not an atheist, but I believe that god has an extremely low probability of existence.

Very funny.

In a perfect vacuum at absolute zero temperature atoms would still have electrons whizzing around their nucleus.

A perfect vacuum and absolute zero cannot exist in our universe.

It's kind of like how we can't make anything go faster than the speed of light.

Animated matter is what everything is made of, it's the organization of atoms that makes the difference.

In other words atoms arranged in a certain specific pattern is what makes you.

You got it, all matter is animated.

There is no inanimate matter in our universe.

Even empty space is literally boiling with activity all the time.

If an alien on another planet looks at the night sky does he see the stars like we do? Of course he does. If his civilization had an equal knowledge to our own they would know that everything is made of extremely small things we call atoms, particles and quarks. They would know math and physics. They would know about moons, planets, nebula, stars, solar systems, galaxies, space and cosmology. They may not have the same names for these things, but all the things we can see would be the same things that they could see. No matter where you are in the universe all the things I mentioned above are the same.

Everything that you observe which takes place outside of yourself and influence is an objective observation. You may not understand what you see or come up with the right answer as to why it behaves the way it does, but you can observe it objectively.

I will say this, I've been reading ethang's posts for several years and the quality of ethang's comment was an order of magnitude better then what I've seen in the past.

What is the difference between animated matter and inanimate matter?

Which branch of science are you most interested in and how do you know that the study at the link is not false?

Were you motivated by something you saw on the news?

Only two? That's all the proof you yourself would need to classify something as scientifically sound?

So how many independent labs should be required to verify that it is "scientific"?

So you want to lay down some rules as to what we should regard as scientific evidence.

Tell me what those rules should be?

Would you prefer I regard you as a creationist or would you prefer I regard you as something else?

I agree, none of that answers the question.

What was the question?

Master Po, whether it's human or alien intelligence makes no difference, the universe is homogeneous so no matter who's looking at it, they're looking at the same things we look at. As long as the intelligent alien knows what we know today they may as well be us (or even better than us).

A universe never seen by us or anything else would be a terrible terrible waste, but that doesn't mean it never existed.