jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

on fundamental matters such as existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind and ethics.

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#161  Postby Thommo » Feb 22, 2018 4:25 pm

Destroyer wrote:Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity just won't succumb to reconciliation, no matter how hard scientists strive... Maybe there really are two distinct behaviors within a single entity. How strange and irrational is that!!!


If that was the case, the difference would be that one would observe particles behaving in accordance with General Relativity on very small (sub Planck length) scales and quantum effects on macroscopic scales.

What actually happens is that each theory is definable incorrect on those scales. There's no doubt which theory makes the correct predictions, only one accords with observation. This is not unlike Galilean Relativity disagreeing with Special Relativity at high speeds. All that happens is one theory is shown to be correct (or empirically adequate depending on one's philosophy of science).
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 27111

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#162  Postby Sendraks » Feb 22, 2018 4:26 pm

Destroyer wrote:
They can strive all they want! The models are already telling them all they will ever find out. Nature is paradoxical. It's appearance of uniformity is misleading.


What a compelling argument from personal incredulity.
:coffee:
"One of the great tragedies of mankind is that morality has been hijacked by religion." - Arthur C Clarke

"'Science doesn't know everything' - Well science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it'd stop" - Dara O'Brian
User avatar
Sendraks
 
Name: D-Money Jr
Posts: 15239
Age: 104
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#163  Postby Destroyer » Feb 22, 2018 4:27 pm

SafeAsMilk wrote:Well as long as you've got yourself convinced then that's all that really matters then, eh.

It is for now, that's for sure. In due course, though, everyone will be educated in accordance with the facts.
Destroyer
 
Name: Patrick Mills
Posts: 1838
Age: 61
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#164  Postby Thommo » Feb 22, 2018 4:28 pm

Can we get an ETA on that, to the nearest year or so?
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 27111

Print view this post

Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#165  Postby Destroyer » Feb 22, 2018 4:29 pm

Thommo wrote:
Destroyer wrote:Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity just won't succumb to reconciliation, no matter how hard scientists strive... Maybe there really are two distinct behaviors within a single entity. How strange and irrational is that!!!


If that was the case, the difference would be that one would observe particles behaving in accordance with General Relativity on very small (sub Planck length) scales and quantum effects on macroscopic scales.

What actually happens is that each theory is definable incorrect on those scales. There's no doubt which theory makes the correct predictions, only one accords with observation. This is not unlike Galilean Relativity disagreeing with Special Relativity at high speeds. All that happens is one theory is shown to be correct (or empirically adequate depending on one's philosophy of science).

Not if One was simply disguised as the other.
Destroyer
 
Name: Patrick Mills
Posts: 1838
Age: 61
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#166  Postby newolder » Feb 22, 2018 4:32 pm

Destroyer wrote:...
They can strive all they want!

No need to shout. Still, I'll wager they feel better knowing that they have your permission to carry on.
The models are already telling them all they will ever find out.

Which models? Find out what?
Nature is paradoxical.

Paradoxes show where current understanding ends - they are fucking great!
It's appearance of uniformity is misleading.

What appearance of uniformity? Misleading to whom?
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
User avatar
newolder
 
Name: Albert Ross
Posts: 7308
Male

Country: Feudal Estate number 9
Print view this post

Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#167  Postby Destroyer » Feb 22, 2018 4:37 pm

newolder wrote:
Destroyer wrote:...
They can strive all they want!

No need to shout. Still, I'll wager they feel better knowing that they have your permission to carry on.
The models are already telling them all they will ever find out.

Which models? Find out what?
Nature is paradoxical.

Paradoxes show where current understanding ends - they are fucking great!
It's appearance of uniformity is misleading.

What appearance of uniformity? Misleading to whom?

Nature appears to be homogeneous, does it not? That is misleading to ALL humanity! Paradoxes are great, I guess, if they are not being masqueraded as logic.

Edit: for clarity.
Last edited by Destroyer on Feb 22, 2018 4:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Destroyer
 
Name: Patrick Mills
Posts: 1838
Age: 61
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#168  Postby Sendraks » Feb 22, 2018 4:38 pm

Destroyer wrote:
Nature appears to be homogeneous, does it not? That is misleading to ALL humanity! Paradoxes are great, I guess, if they are not masquerading for logic.


Low calorie word salad.
"One of the great tragedies of mankind is that morality has been hijacked by religion." - Arthur C Clarke

"'Science doesn't know everything' - Well science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it'd stop" - Dara O'Brian
User avatar
Sendraks
 
Name: D-Money Jr
Posts: 15239
Age: 104
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#169  Postby SafeAsMilk » Feb 22, 2018 4:52 pm

Destroyer wrote:
SafeAsMilk wrote:Well as long as you've got yourself convinced then that's all that really matters then, eh.

It is for now, that's for sure. In due course, though, everyone will be educated in accordance with the facts.

If you had any facts, you could do something other than beat your chest about how you'll be vindicated some day.
"They call it the American dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it." -- George Carlin
User avatar
SafeAsMilk
 
Name: Makes Fails
Posts: 14393
Age: 40
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#170  Postby Thommo » Feb 22, 2018 4:53 pm

Destroyer wrote:
Thommo wrote:
Destroyer wrote:Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity just won't succumb to reconciliation, no matter how hard scientists strive... Maybe there really are two distinct behaviors within a single entity. How strange and irrational is that!!!


If that was the case, the difference would be that one would observe particles behaving in accordance with General Relativity on very small (sub Planck length) scales and quantum effects on macroscopic scales.

What actually happens is that each theory is definable incorrect on those scales. There's no doubt which theory makes the correct predictions, only one accords with observation. This is not unlike Galilean Relativity disagreeing with Special Relativity at high speeds. All that happens is one theory is shown to be correct (or empirically adequate depending on one's philosophy of science).

Not if One was simply disguised as the other.


Yeah, but they aren't. That's the point, the predictions don't match observations under certain circumstances. If reality was both quantum and relativistic on those scales, then you'd have two sets of contradictory predictions both being true. What actually happens is a lot more mundane - one set fails.

Somehow you seem to have confused the conflicting predictions with conflicting observations.
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 27111

Print view this post

Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#171  Postby Destroyer » Feb 22, 2018 4:57 pm

SafeAsMilk wrote:
Destroyer wrote:
SafeAsMilk wrote:Well as long as you've got yourself convinced then that's all that really matters then, eh.

It is for now, that's for sure. In due course, though, everyone will be educated in accordance with the facts.

If you had any facts, you could do something other than beat your chest about how you'll be vindicated some day.

In theory, I do agree with that. But there are legitimate grounds for privacy/secrecy, at present. For example, there are many top scientists who are now familiar with my argument via private communication.
Destroyer
 
Name: Patrick Mills
Posts: 1838
Age: 61
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#172  Postby Destroyer » Feb 22, 2018 4:59 pm

Thommo wrote:
Destroyer wrote:
Thommo wrote:
Destroyer wrote:Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity just won't succumb to reconciliation, no matter how hard scientists strive... Maybe there really are two distinct behaviors within a single entity. How strange and irrational is that!!!


If that was the case, the difference would be that one would observe particles behaving in accordance with General Relativity on very small (sub Planck length) scales and quantum effects on macroscopic scales.

What actually happens is that each theory is definable incorrect on those scales. There's no doubt which theory makes the correct predictions, only one accords with observation. This is not unlike Galilean Relativity disagreeing with Special Relativity at high speeds. All that happens is one theory is shown to be correct (or empirically adequate depending on one's philosophy of science).

Not if One was simply disguised as the other.


Yeah, but they aren't. That's the point, the predictions don't match observations under certain circumstances. If reality was both quantum and relativistic on those scales, then you'd have two sets of contradictory predictions both being true. What actually happens is a lot more mundane - one set fails.

Somehow you seem to have confused the conflicting predictions with conflicting observations.

I am not saying that Reality is both. I am saying that a single entity is irrationally exhibiting two incompatible ways of behavior.
Destroyer
 
Name: Patrick Mills
Posts: 1838
Age: 61
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#173  Postby newolder » Feb 22, 2018 5:00 pm

Destroyer wrote:...
Nature appears to be homogeneous, does it not? That is misleading to ALL humanity! Paradoxes are great, I guess, if they are not being masqueraded as logic.

Edit: for clarity.

Earlier:
Truth is whichever Nature happens to be fundamental.

Truth is inhomogeneous? All is clear. :crazy:
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
User avatar
newolder
 
Name: Albert Ross
Posts: 7308
Male

Country: Feudal Estate number 9
Print view this post

Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#174  Postby SafeAsMilk » Feb 22, 2018 5:01 pm

Destroyer wrote:
SafeAsMilk wrote:
Destroyer wrote:
SafeAsMilk wrote:Well as long as you've got yourself convinced then that's all that really matters then, eh.

It is for now, that's for sure. In due course, though, everyone will be educated in accordance with the facts.

If you had any facts, you could do something other than beat your chest about how you'll be vindicated some day.

In theory, I do agree with that. But there are legitimate grounds for privacy/secrecy, at present. For example, there are many top scientists who are now familiar with my argument via private communication.

I'm starting to suspect this is all a conspiracy by Reynolds Wrap to sell more tin foil.
"They call it the American dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it." -- George Carlin
User avatar
SafeAsMilk
 
Name: Makes Fails
Posts: 14393
Age: 40
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#175  Postby Sendraks » Feb 22, 2018 5:02 pm

Destroyer wrote:
For example, there are many top scientists who are now familiar with my argument via private communication.


"Oh no, not another e-mail from this crackpot again" said the top scientist looking at her in-box. She was honestly boggled as to why she kept receiving the communications from this person, when what they were proposing was painfully apparent from the outset and the further messages seemed to only be repetitively asserting the same point over and over, without supply any evidence.
"One of the great tragedies of mankind is that morality has been hijacked by religion." - Arthur C Clarke

"'Science doesn't know everything' - Well science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it'd stop" - Dara O'Brian
User avatar
Sendraks
 
Name: D-Money Jr
Posts: 15239
Age: 104
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#176  Postby Destroyer » Feb 22, 2018 5:04 pm

newolder wrote:
Destroyer wrote:...
Nature appears to be homogeneous, does it not? That is misleading to ALL humanity! Paradoxes are great, I guess, if they are not being masqueraded as logic.

Edit: for clarity.

Earlier:
Truth is whichever Nature happens to be fundamental.

Truth is inhomogeneous? All is clear. :crazy:

Having the appearance of uniformity, and actually being paradoxical, does not mean that there is no foundational substance to existence.
Destroyer
 
Name: Patrick Mills
Posts: 1838
Age: 61
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#177  Postby SafeAsMilk » Feb 22, 2018 5:05 pm

Sendraks wrote:
"Oh no, not another e-mail from this crackpot again" said the top scientist looking at her in-box. She was honestly boggled as to why she kept receiving the communications from this person, when what they were proposing was painfully apparent from the outset and the further messages seemed to only be repetitively asserting the same point over and over, without supply any evidence.


Top Scientist began forwarding the correspondence to Bottom Scientist, because she knows he loves that sort of masochistic shit.
"They call it the American dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it." -- George Carlin
User avatar
SafeAsMilk
 
Name: Makes Fails
Posts: 14393
Age: 40
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#178  Postby Destroyer » Feb 22, 2018 5:08 pm

SafeAsMilk wrote:
Destroyer wrote:
SafeAsMilk wrote:
Destroyer wrote:
It is for now, that's for sure. In due course, though, everyone will be educated in accordance with the facts.

If you had any facts, you could do something other than beat your chest about how you'll be vindicated some day.

In theory, I do agree with that. But there are legitimate grounds for privacy/secrecy, at present. For example, there are many top scientists who are now familiar with my argument via private communication.

I'm starting to suspect this is all a conspiracy by Reynolds Wrap to sell more tin foil.

Maybe so. Time will tell.
Destroyer
 
Name: Patrick Mills
Posts: 1838
Age: 61
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#179  Postby Sendraks » Feb 22, 2018 5:10 pm

Destroyer wrote:
Maybe so. Time will tell.


Safe money says that all of us here will be dead without the much promised "revelation" happening.
:coffee:
"One of the great tragedies of mankind is that morality has been hijacked by religion." - Arthur C Clarke

"'Science doesn't know everything' - Well science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it'd stop" - Dara O'Brian
User avatar
Sendraks
 
Name: D-Money Jr
Posts: 15239
Age: 104
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Re: jamest: a Q&A session for serious questions

#180  Postby SafeAsMilk » Feb 22, 2018 5:11 pm

Destroyer wrote:
SafeAsMilk wrote:
Destroyer wrote:
SafeAsMilk wrote:
If you had any facts, you could do something other than beat your chest about how you'll be vindicated some day.

In theory, I do agree with that. But there are legitimate grounds for privacy/secrecy, at present. For example, there are many top scientists who are now familiar with my argument via private communication.

I'm starting to suspect this is all a conspiracy by Reynolds Wrap to sell more tin foil.

Maybe so. Time will tell.

It's telling pretty well right now, I think.
"They call it the American dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it." -- George Carlin
User avatar
SafeAsMilk
 
Name: Makes Fails
Posts: 14393
Age: 40
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest