SCIENCE IS FALSE (proof)

I project that I can prove that either:
1) The universe is literally INFINITELY complex
2) There is such thing as the supernatural

And maybe even that the supernatural HAS to exist

Argument:
1) In order for the universe to be dictated purely by science, then science must be able to explain everything. That which can not be explained by humans(quantum physics, perhaps) must still obey rules of science and the universe.
2) In order for something to be explained scientifically, one must be able to tell 'why' it happened.
3) Any scientific answer to a scientific question can be followed up with the question 'why'

- Therefore, if the universe follows only the rules of science, then every answer to every 'why' question can then be asked 'why' of, creating a chain of question/answers. This chain would have to be infinitely long (i.e., have NO end)

- The only POSSIBLE way to break the chain of why questions is to have an answer like "because the laws of the universe were randomly created that way, with NOTHING as their cause". If this were to be the case, such an event would be supernatural, not scientific.

- A supernatural explanation is the only way to break from the logical chain of questions.



Conclusions:
1) Science alone can NEVER explain the universe fully.
2) Supernatural explanations MIGHT be able to explain the universe fully.

And, maybe even:
3) It is illogical to have a working universe that can not be explained logically, even if a trillion universes filled with computers with a trillion ^ trillion ^ trillion terabytes of storage each were used to hold said explanation. (even that would be relatively zero compared to the complexity of a scientific universe)

3.1) The answers to why our universe is the way it is MUST lie outside of the realm of science, and MUST come from the supernatural (keep in mind the supernatural CAN be explained with logic, just not with scientific process, so believing in the supernatural does not conflict with logic)

3.2) Because the universe can not both fully follow the laws of science AND be completely logical, then the supernatural MUST exist.



I haven't smoothed out all the kinks yet, but I'm working on it.

Example for the confused

How does gravity work?
"matter pulls toward itself (weak explanation, I know)"
why does matter do that?

"well..... maybe because there is another dimension where matter is always ineracting with itself, and we see the results in this dimension"
why does it work that way?

"well..... maybe during the big bang the amounts of energy used tore apart a single dimension into several small dimensions, but they still remained somewhat conneted...."
why into the dimensions we see here? Why not other dimensions?

"answer"
why does it work like that?

"answer"
why does it work like that?

on to infinity....

I would also like to add that while this argument MAY prove that the root of the universe lies in supernatural causes, that doesn't mean that supernatural events still happen today, or that anything like ghosts, aliens, god, telepathy, or whatever else has to exist.

>>1
If you can prove the supernatural exists, by definition it is natural. Fail. Go back to bumping your DIAMAND IS METOL thread.

>>3

No, if you had read my post you would have seen that I define the supernatural simply as things that have no scientific cause. You know, the offical definition.

Any scientific answer to a scientific question can be followed up with the question 'why'

Prove it.

In order for the universe to be dictated purely by science, then science must be able to explain everything.

Fail. Science describes the universe, it doesn't form it. Science isn't something with a capital S waiting out there to be discovered; it is merely the accumulation of knowledge.

Topic loses.

There are many ways to get around a sequence of "Why?" questions. If you phrase your answers carefully, you can feed the why questions into a circular loop... when that happens, every single one of the "Why?" questions would have an answer.

>>1
I have a problem with Argument 1 - Just because science can't explain everything in the known universe doesn't mean that the universe isn't dictated by science. That's why we employ these people called "Scientists" who are currently working all that stuff out.

Also, I don't see how you arrived at the conclusion that "Science alone can NEVER explain the universe fully." Or how a chain of "why" questions has to be "infinitely long". Can you explain your argument a bit better?

>>1
There are no supernatural things. There are unexplained things, but we just lack scientific understanding of them. Supernatural is bad word, something that defies nature can't exist.

science doesn't dictate things... it's a way of mapping out physical (or intellectual) "territory."

a map can only go so far, since it can never actually become the thing it describes.

etc etc.  agree with original poster.

i dislike geometric proofs, though.

Why?

Just when I thought /sci/ couldn't get any worse, this thread appears.

Also, if you produce a failsafe argument that supernatural things have to exist, they are no longer supernatural. (== Proof by contradiction that supernatural things can't be proven to exist?)

saging in a fucking stupid thread

WTF?!?!?!?!?
　　∧∧
　　（　 ･ω･）
　 ＿|　⊃／(＿＿_
／　└-(＿＿＿_／
￣￣￣￣￣￣￣


Thank heavens! It was only a dream.
　　∧∧
　　（　 ･ω･）
　 ＿|　⊃／(＿＿_
／　└-(＿＿＿_／
￣￣￣￣￣￣￣


    ＜⌒／ヽ-、_＿_
／＜_/＿＿＿＿／

your argument is poor, less of an argument and more of a poor dribbled attempt to disprove what science does to explain the universe. do you even know what science is?

Your argument is poor. Science is superior.

>>4
No if you had read my post you would understand my argument and not say something so stupid.

If it has physical proof it stops being supernatural. So if you see a ghost it is because the ghost obeys the laws of the universe that we are not aware of yes, whether the ghost is a spirit or a hallucination.

yet*

>>1
The universe is literally INFINITELY complex
Infinity is a mathematical concept, it does not physically exist.  You are an idiot.

>>1
Your logic is retarded, science is better

>>21
Your science is retarded.  OP making shit up based on what he learned before dropping out of high school is better.

>>1
I)You've confused science with the Laws of Physics. The universe obeys the Laws of Physics, not science.  Science is our interpretation of the Laws of Physics.
II)Science only asks "why?" when looking for apecific answer, not for abstract questions like "Why are the Laws of Physics the way that they are?"
III)You are fail.
IV)Science is win.