I think your thinking is seeing only one side of a two-sided coin. My model is both Mechanical (scientific) and Organic (philosophical). — Gnomon
In the Enformationism metaphor, the real world was originally an idea in the Mind of G*D, with the infinite possibilities of Omniscience, that was realized by an act of Will. — Gnomon
Hmm. As usual an education in your post(s). But as to the vague, it seems to me the only thing vague about, e.g., the irrationals is the inability of exactly representing them in some number systems. When it's at home, I'm sure the square root of two knows where its pipe and matches are, and its footrest.even though they are at root vague values, being irrational numbers. — apokrisis
When it's at home, I'm sure the square root of two knows where its pipe and matches are, and its footrest. — tim wood
That is, the irrationality is not in the thing itself, but its relationship to other things. — tim wood
Gravity must run its couplings — apokrisis
But the point is that it you can construct a machinery of asymptotic approach to a fixed point, then the inverse of that mathematical operation has to be able to pop back out of that point to — apokrisis
Why should gravitons have a running coupling constant? — LaRochelle
Just a minor point, but in dynamical systems this is not necessarily so. — jgill
Do you, by chance, have such a degree? — jgill
Are gravitons even real, rather than virtual calculational devices — apokrisis
Virtual particles are said to be mathematical tools, that's a common naive approach, made by people who don't care to investigate further. — LaRochelle
Now you are putting words in mu mind. I don't have a binary view, however long your array of words may be to explain that. I simply stated the reality of gravitons. That may seem binary to you but it surely isn't. It's kind of unitary! But luckily I pull this view within the boundaries of a tertiary system. — LaRochelle
A virtual particle is just a particle not abiding to the usual energy-momentum relation. It takes care for interaction and as such cannot be directly observed. That's why it's called virtual. It mediates between real particles. — LaRochelle
Not so. Number yes; point - length - no. I construct a square. By assumption the sides are of a determinate length to which, say, an integer value is assigned. The hypotenuse is certainly a determinate length. The problem only trying to assign a distinct value in terms of the side. And as that value can be carried out to an arbitrary degree of precision, it would seem that "vague" itself would need some qualification.Yet also, the very notion of an irrational number tells us that point lies at infinity. — apokrisis
Simplest example in the complex plane. — jgill
By assumption the sides are of a determinate length to which, say, an integer value is assigned. — tim wood
And as that value can be carried out to an arbitrary degree of precision, it would seem that "vague" itself would need some qualification. — tim wood
Not quite. But intuitively pleasing. It's again the popular naive view of the layman. A quantum vacuum is not involved in interaction. Well, minorly. — LaRochelle
The exception being the gauge for the weak interaction, giving rise to massive ones, which only indicates that the invoked symmetry breaking is an unohysical state of affairs, though mathematically satisfying. — LaRochelle
OK. So what's your Causal Model or God Metaphor?But even as a metaphor, that is quite the wrong kind of causal model for the kind of self-organising immanence I’m talking about. We diverge big time there. — apokrisis
Careful!! I'm not sure what you are saying here, but it sounds like putdownery. :cool:It is like you are the forum's own virtual particle, forever erupting and self-annihilating from the cyber void. Your contributions exist because the PF vacuum expectation value must manifest its daily quota of crackpottery. — apokrisis
Modern physics is reduced to a mathematical exercise without being in touch with the reality of the stuff it describes, — LaRochelle
I asked questions about the both on a physics forum and the response was, as usual, axiomatic. With almost an instant ban following. But axioms are there to broken. — LaRochelle
OK. So what's your Causal Model or God Metaphor? — Gnomon
So, my personal model is the relatively simple algorithm of Hegelian dialectic : the world progresses toward the future along a zig-zag path of positive & negative causes, which tend to sum to a Middle Way (Buddha) or Moderation (Aristotle). — Gnomon
Careful!! I'm not sure what you are saying here, but it sounds like putdownery — Gnomon
The scientific method does not exist. — LaRochelle
you only have a superficial and a naive layman's knowledge of the model we are talking about here. — LaRochelle
That happens usually when you attack the orthodoxy. — LaRochelle
Well, entropy always increases. — Fredastar
The gravitational field is huge. — Elisabeth
Yes, and it seems as though gravity alone can induce ordered states, such as the supermassive black-hole at the center of our galaxy. — Shawn
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.