I’ll admit that for a while now I’ve been unsure what to do with the following bit of photographic evidence that happened to fall into my hands. But, following PZ’s sterling example, our first duty must always be to honesty, and let the chips fall where they may.
Of course it’s a Utah teapot.
It’s the flying teapot in the sky
from whence all dark energy flows
or could it be green tea it brews
or maybe the jean genie in a stew
–
I know, I know – it’s a metaphor
This is the source of the universe
it pours like liquid from the spout
goes thru you and you and recycled
returns to make another magic brew
–
Hope you had a great Thankgiving!
Whether you thanked mum and dad
or simply thanked your lucky stars
–
Didn’t the FDA put a ban on Mormon tea? So what do they put now in the Utah teapot??
This reminds me of the syllogistic absurdity i used to use in my classes for students to begin to appreciate the difference between logos and mythos. Most accept that the square root of two is an irrational number that can be rounded to a thousandth decimel of 1.414… this can be shown in a number of solution sets for various arithmetic and mathmetic constructs dating back more than two thousand years. The Greeks referred to this as part of the logos, that which is proveable, debateable, logical, to be critiqued. But i posit the square root of two being equal to blue. I know that to be true, and there is no proof for falsifiability nor verifiability of that equation; it just is. The Greeks referred to this as mythos, those things that are statements of absolute truth beyond the realm of verifiability and testing.
Unfortunately for all of us, a group of second century CE theologians leaped all over this one, and proclaimed that the old religions were part of the mythos while this new Christian thang was the Word, and pure logos. By twisting mythos into logos, we have been hampered for 2000 years; no matter how much we are trying to undo this linguistic entanglement.
I should think it at least merits a hat tip to Daevid Allen.
High in the sky, what do you see ?
Come down to Earth, a cup of tea
Flying saucer, flying teacup
From outer space, Flying Teapot
Yeah, I am a little familiar with the Mormon’s tea policy. Perhaps this picture is an omen to Sean that his next Thanksgiving post needs to give thanks to Tea/T-Duality.
If it’s floating around in space there can’t be any tea in it. So it must be a cosmological null-tea.
If the Universe goes on for too long, most teapots will be spontaneously created from the vacuum rather than manufactured by people. This is the “Boltzmann teapot paradox” 🙂
It’s Clifford’s Lost Teapot that accompanies his set of “Storms in a Teacup”.
Yeah JimBOB, my first thought was Gong, too
Great lyrics from Daevid Allen, mind you
depending what tea you drink you could end
up at the “Mad Hatter’s Tea Party” with Alice
Gosh, – I wonder where half my old vynils are
Hey Sean, what do you think of the LMT?
http://www.lmtgtm.org/science.html
twinkle twinkle little bat
how I wonder what you’re at
Up above the world you fly
Like a teapot in the sky
As is well known to all Max users, a teapot is a geometric primitive, with the same status as a box, a sphere, a cylinder, a torus, a cone, a geosphere, a tube, a pyramid, or a plane.
🙂 Looks like the infinite improbability drive was at work – Don’t Panic!
B, I’ve gotta compliment you on your sphere of speculation, which is most fantastic in nature! Sorry to say though, I’ve got some obvious reservations about just how this sluggish-looking, not to mention frail-looking teapot could possibly survive “Infinite Improbability Drive”. But then, on second thought, all the numerous crackpots scattered across the human-specific biosphere might simply be relics from all the numerous failed attempts to have human-teapots reach faster-than-light drive on planet Earth.;)
A new form of Tea-Duality.
“If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.”
The presence of this teapot is disprovable by the scientific method. Just fly a probe to the region. Religion, and beliefe in God is not disprovable by the scientific method.
“The reason organized religion merits outright hostility is that, unlike belief in Russell’s teapot, religion is powerful, influential, tax-exempt and systematically passed on to children too young to defend themselves. ”
Defend themselves against what? Against something that many adults have converted to (and still convert to) who were once athiests, by their own volition?
I also think that since the President is powerful and influential, he/she deserves outright hostility. Meditation is also powerful and influential and therefore deserves outright hostility. Science as well.
“Children are not compelled to spend their formative years memorizing loony books about teapots. Government-subsidized schools don’t exclude children whose parents prefer the wrong shape of teapot. Teapot-believers don’t stone teapot-unbelievers, teapot-apostates, teapot-heretics and teapot-blasphemers to death. Mothers don’t warn their sons off marrying teapot-shiksas whose parents believe in three teapots rather than one. People who put the milk in first don’t kneecap those who put the tea in first.”
Well duuh. That’s because teapots in outer space most likely don’t exist and science can one day prove this with a spacecraft. Also, the existence of teapots in outer space is not allowed by the currently accepted model of solar system formation (neglecting the possibility that aliens deposited a teapot in outer space).
Of course, when I say that religion is not disprovable by the scientific method, I mean the self evident statement that follows from the fact that the major tenets of religions which are, of course, beyond scientific investigation (ie. God exists, Jesus rose from the dead, God spoke to Moses).
More confusing than the teapot is the minimum of five different sources of illumination necessary to explain the lighting on all the bodies in this picture…
This photgraphic evidence justifys my long-standing faith in the teapot. Oh sure, everyone said, “But there’s no evidence for the teapot!” But I had faith. Now all I need is a photograph of jesus ascending into Heaven and I’ll be set!
Damn. I wondered where I put that teapot…
Vince writes “The presence of this teapot is disprovable by the scientific method. Just fly a probe to the region. Religion, and beliefe in God is not disprovable by the scientific method.”
No its not disprovable, by definition this teapot is too small to ever be observable.
One hundred years ago
neutrinos could not be counted or measured
Does that mean neutrinos do not exist?
and, did not exist one hundred years ago?
–
I thought neutrinos are supposed to have started their journey 13.7 billion years ago in a big bang that cannot be proved (or disproved) – and flew straight thru the great teapot in the sky, and the teapot where you are brewing your pot of tea
Whether Tin tea pot, or china teapot?
Must be proof that intelligent life ‘created’ it
And used it in some (obscure) ritual called ‘brewing tea’
–
Whether this ritual was imported to China from India, or whether the British Empire tried to tax the ritual – no one is sure, but someone tells me “The Boston Tea Party” is where American Independence began. And the Sensational Alex Harvey Band’s track of the same name is still awesome, though not neutrinos but some other ‘nuclear decay’ have already called time on the man
Originally, this talk on a teapot in interplanetary space was, more or less, gently oscillating between physics and culture. Then somehow, strangely enough, this teapot managed to find itself amidst religion and – of all things – amidst intelligent design. Yet, with the help or Quasar, of course;), it has managed to become embroiled in an epic tea party. Now, it’s truly unfathomable to me how this little teapot has ended up sitting in the middle of the American Revolution. Go figure!
“No its not disprovable, by definition this teapot is too small to ever be observable.”
Then it doesn’t exist, by quantum mechanics.
Also, if it’s too small to be observable, then how is it a teapot? A teapot is something you use to brew tea. If it’s too small to be observable, then you can’t use it to brew tea, hence it’s not a teapot. If a chair had all its legs removed, it’s not a chair anymore. If a physical object can’t, in principle, be observed, then in what sense is it a physical object?
Also, I’m not sure what’s wrong with parents, who believe in a religion and in its truth and benefit to themselves and to society (as long as it embraces the dignity and rights of all humans), passing on their religion to their kids. Unfortunately, I can’t ask Russell.