Nickerless Gasbag!
4m — universeness

That's it! "The Dark Solution", by Nickerless Gasbag! :lol:

You're priceless and worth a zillion at the same time!

Stop reversing things you rebel! It's Ninja Quark not 'quark ninja.' I think 'quark ninja' was the Ferengi bar owner on Deep Space 9! — universeness

I watched, coincidentally, a Star Trek Voyager episode, with captain Picard. In search for a vaccine the team ended up in a fight between the crew member with short blond hair and a black planet habitant. Both women, equipped with artificial hands with sharp pins with poison tips...

I don't know everything. What gave you that idea? I know the fundamentals. Which is but a small part but the necessary part to understand the origin and evolution of the cosmos.

What's an RE course?

True. The only problem is that these individuals are all over the place polluting so many discussions. Ignoring them after the initial interaction may be the best tactic. — Nickolasgaspar

Then what you wanna discuss about? Rational Logical Arguments on Sound Scientific or Metaphysical Basis, to construct a Solid Epistemology to start from?

A strawman. I do believe interaction with the world is neessary for us to form ideas. It is a necessary condition, just not a sifficient one. Perception is not indepent of an perceiver. Impressions of the world land with a person already invested with preconceptions about how the world is, which will lead him or her to interpret data in particular ways. What I ispute is objective access to the outside world. — Tobias

Exactly! :up:

Do they inform you if they are going to answer your question in the podcast? — universeness

They ask a dollar to question but without guaranteed response. You gave guaranteed response when you were a teacher. But it's worthwhile! A dollar I can spare!

Ive asked a question on the reactions part. The same I asked him by email. I have to check how to pay him that dollar.

it goes like this
-I don't know (jump)god
-Science doesn't know (jump) god
-We know everything(jump) god
-I don't understand (Jump) god
-universe exists (jump) god — Nickolasgaspar

Okay, let's Analyze and offer Purely Reasoned Critique.

"I don't know (jump)god"

I do know gods. And by reading your "Comments", I can only conclude that some human gods are weird ones.

"Science doesn't know (jump) god"

Science doesn't know indeed. But I do.

"I don't understand (Jump) god"

But I do understand why they created the universe. But you don't accept that.

"We know everything(jump) god"

We (or me) know the basics. Of course we don't know everything that happens. Which can be considered an even greater argument for gods. Not because we can't know, but because we don't know.

universe exists (jump) god — Nickolasgaspar

Yes. The existence of the universe is proof when you know the cosmic workings.

Hillary is a lost cause. "Jumps" are programmed in his syllogisms and no GOSUBs are allowed lol.
it goes like this
-I don't know (jump)god
-Science doesn't know (jump) god
-We know everything(jump) god
-I don't understand (Jump) god
-universe exists (jump) god
ITs like trying to reason with a 5yo while being at a party with other kids.
Not possible. — Nickolasgaspar

Keep it coming, gasbag gaspar! :lol:

gasbag gaspar — universeness

I might change my pseudonym name to gasbag gaspar, instead of quark ninja... Catchy! :wink:

Did mommy refuse to hug you again this morning? — universeness

:lol:

Ha! You're the best!

Every culture might prosper, but apparently many like the gadgets produced based on a scientific understanding of the world. — Tobias

Yes, and rightly so! I like my little phone too! Why not? I mentioned Feyerabend because he shows very well that science is one culture amongst many. A very likable culture! Just look at the wonders of technique. But that same technique can cause mayhem too. And the mayhem caused is unprecedented in human history. Of course, the successes too. But these are usually put to the front in the justification, not the bad things.

Heisenbergs uncertainty principle begs to differ. If you know the exact location of a particle you cannot know it’s velocity and vice versa. It’s like a dot verses a line on a piece of paper. If you have a dot you don’t know what direction it may make a line to and if you have a line you don’t know at which point along that line the original dot was drawn. It’s a simplified Illustration but mathematically Heisenbergs uncertainty principle appears to hold true. You cannot know all information simultaneously as information itself is change and change cannot stop even momentarily. — Benj96

Weel, that's according to one interpretation of QM.. There are other interpretations in which a partcle has determined values of all non-commuting observables. Take, for example, the z-direction of spin. It doesn't commute with Sx and Sy. Now, entangle two electrons. Measure simulataneously the Sz1 and Sz2. The components of the other, Sz2 and Sx1, are instantly known. So both S1z as S1x can be known at the same time.

An electron around a proton can, when in an s-orbital, have precise positions, with zero velocity, if it jumps instantaneously between all positions within the bounds of the wavefunction.

Yeah my dear Hillary. If they had announced these already, they would have to be unemployed then,since there aren't much secrets left about universe as to keep their jobs. It is crystal clear that this is the reason.You are right . Damn Nasa bastards. — dimosthenis9

Damn Dimo! We understand each other! :lol:

It is precisely these kinds of mistakes that result in gibberish. — I like sushi

If sunshine was called rainfall, then tomorrow the rain would fall if the Sun shone...

And some Nasa fools still struggle to see what is going on with these two. Make these suckers a favor and go them that. — dimosthenis9

I tried, my dear Dimosthenis! The fools are too worried for their jobs though... Isn't it clear? Small black holes whirl through the galaxies. With small radii. The closed universe expands on a higher dimensional hyperbolically underground space, the source of dark energy and inflation... The dumbos... :cool:

f yellow was called blue then would it rain tomorrow? — I like sushi

Interesting question! If the Sun was called rain it would probably rain if the Sun shines tomorrow.

No they start learning behavior that woks, they do not necessarily form ' a correct model of reality' in there minds — Tobias

And that behavior can be conducted as well by looking at the stars and base it on the configurations of the stars. Maybe not as you like it, or as science likes it but that's up to the people themselves. Science can offer a plead at most to conduct live on scientific base (and technological gadgets are very convincing!) but no more than that. It can't tell it's the way of conduct. Which has brought the world on the brink of a "nuclear exchange", to put it mildly, and natural disasters.

I can validate empirically the value of Objective Verification.... — Nickolasgaspar

Yes, I can too. God (gods) is, objectively verified, an important element in human life. You can't deny that. As a Greek you should know.

I don't know. But responding with "therefore, it must be some supernatural intelligence" is a god of the gaps fallacy. — Michael

Well, maybe. But science can't answer my question, because I have a model to account from the beginning to know. So it's no fallacy.

I see a computer desk with a small notebook, thin and light. Next of me is a cup of brown liquid drawn from beans that originated somewhere in Africa or south America. I am communicating with someone possibly many miles away (or possibly my next door neighbour, since you understand Dutch and has a stint at the VU so I cannot be sure). I see a prosperity the world has not witnessed before and an abundance of what life has to offer... I know my generation will, if we are not wiped of this earth, live to become 80 years old... I know there are bad things too, but undeniably human life became a lot easier and pleasant with the scientific method. — Tobias

Pretty alike what I see, except I type on a phone, listen to the Belfast Child, pet my dog and answer my wife what's that on her face. Probably Im around your corner! Somewhere in the center, not far away from Utrecht. I rather had seen more nature though. It looks like a Mondriaan painting from above! But what can we do? It just is as it is...

A prosperous world as never seen before? That's what they told you. In the old days it wasn't as good as today and scientific progress wasn't so far. The stone age, the iron age, the steam era, the electricity era, the atomic age, what's next? Science is nice, but why make it the norm?

I can point you at non-prosperity as well. Every culture has prosperities. Im glad prof. Kirschemann at the VU gave stuff to read about Feyerabend!

That's the god of the gaps fallacy; our scientific theories can't explain X, therefore God(s) explain X. — Michael

Our science theories can't explain where the ingredients it describes come from. Even when new matter is introduced. As far as I can see the origin of matter lays in an infinite past. But what's the reason it exists in the first place? It just exists? What for? How can non-intelligent stuff has brought itself into existence?

. Therefore we teach the kids stuff that has a proven track record of obtaining results. — Tobias

Every culture has a proven track record of obtaining results.

Of course I know the VU, been there lots of times. The reason why we teach chemmistry, physics, math etc and not astrology is cultural, but not arbitrary. — Tobias

No, of course it's not arbitrary. But why is scientific culture better than other cultures (of which many have been wiped away from the face of the world by science and western religion)?

Currently we are very interested in what works and less in written dogma. — Tobias

And how did that work out? Just take a look around you to see...

From the link:

"God of the gaps" is a theological perspective in which gaps in scientific knowledge are taken to be evidence or proof of God's existence"

In my scientific knowledge there is no gap. You can call that haughty or whatever, but the material universe holds no secrets for me. But from where comes matter itself? Okay, real matter inflated into real existence from virtual matter. And a previous inflated real universe triggered it. And before that another, etc. But where does that series come from?

Well, maybe the nature of charge is a mystery. WTF is charge? Gods know...

So not a gap is evidence but the knowledge.

Currently we are very interested in what works and less in written dogma. — Tobias

Central dogma of molecular biology

Propaganda:



It's the higher power that gives mass. Litteraly. The God particle is just ordinary matter. A hyperstrong hyper
color force is the higher power.



Ohooh...

Ouioui!

The local exceptions are life and being, all that really matters to us — magritte

Yes, it are the exceptions that matter. That's where it's happening. But why isn't the exception an increase in entropy? So it all goes backwards? Why the fuck did it start at time zero? Of course it does and did. But the begin could just have well been at infinity. This is the fundamental problem of the direction of time. No more and no less.

Similarly, Physics today says that Dark Matter makes up about 80% - 90% of the tangible universe. You should be swimming in Dark Matter. That is as supernatural as the belief in the Supreme Being. — Rocco Rosano

No, it isn't if you don't mind me saying. Dark matter is five times as abundant as normal matter and is made up from normal matter turned black holes. Dark energy, said to be 70% of the total energy, is no matter or energy at all. It's the structure of higher dimensional space the universe expands in. So both are known.

Tis better to have lived and suffered than never to have lived at all. — Agent Smith

During the suffering though, this feels differently... What if the suffering continues?

"Imagination and fantasy can only help us to come up with out of the box hypotheses and make connections that our trained minds can't make." — Nickolasgaspar

Indeed. And your mind is trained to demand a kind of proof for a claim for which no such a proof can be given, and every proof for such a claim is reduced to fantasy, of which it is exactly the question if it is a fantasy. If I say the gods can maybe interfere by means of hidden variables of QM (by adjusting the outcome of interactions between particles, which involve wavefunction collapse) or that I saw them in a dream you say it's nonsense. But did you check if all collapses during all interactions in the universe are as probability expects them to be? No. You expect that all interactions, measurements, are conform the laws of QM, but these laws allow for improbable events.

What do you mean by learning astrology 'by law'? Should apply a legal perspective to astrology, or an astrological perspective to law? I really do not understand, it is not meant sarcastically or anything. — Tobias

What I mean is that what we learn at school or universities is science. Math, physics, economy, chemistry, biology, etc. By law you have to go to school and learn about it. I don't care to learn, I was fascinated by physics and even voluntarily studied it at the VU (which you probably know). But why shouldn't, for example, astrology be learned by law? What's inherently better about science?

By law I mean that it's written in the law to go to school from young age already and learn about science.

Just because you can't answer is it doesn't mean there is no answer. Bye!

Can people be banned for trolling? — I like sushi

Are you a troll?

The question is not physical but philosophical. The physical answer states that time measures growing entropy. The chance of gas particles in one corner is smaller than being all around the the container. So particles move from small entropic states to higher. With local exceptions, like Earth, but the global entropy still increasing. The philosophical question, for which physics has no answer, is, why isn't it the other way round? Why doesn't the universe started at a time at infinity? Why shouldn't it start at maximum entropy and decrease to less? The end situation reversed will have such behavior. The law would then be that matter moves towards less probable states. Why should more probable states have the preference. That holds only if time is already going forward. But if the initial conditions laid at the end and were reversed time would go backwards. I know it's not the case, but why not? The end would be the beginning then. The initial conditions could have been a reversed end condition. But it's not. Why not?

We don't want any one to steal our Nobel Prize! right!! — Nickolasgaspar

Well, I've told it many times already. On physics forums which stick to the status quo or the convention, and here, where little help is offered, except by @universeness and some others, who try to understand at least, instead of throw it away without even inspecting it (as is done on most physics forums). So this seems a good place for it. The philosophy forums are generally more perceptive. Physicists are afraid their standards are attacked.

There's a lot that isn't explained today, and I see no reason to believe humanity will ever explain everything. The actual nature of reality may never be known — Relativist

That depends on it's actual nature. I think everything can actually be known. Why not? From the big bangs to the mind. But why should we want to? The mystery of the eternal gods never can be known. It's nice to have a material explanation for the universe though...

Or that we are the result of evolving life whose only purpose it is to pass on genes or memes.
Notice that you assume there is a "purpose". If I flip a coin and it comes up tails, does that fulfill a purpose? — Relativist

The standard view on evolution, genes or memes trying to replicate, says the purpose of life is to do exactly that. Replicating genes or memes (which, btw, is based on an unproven dogma). But in the light of gods it gets a different shine.
If you flip a coin it might have a purpose. It depends. The coins flipped near the big bang have no purpose. The flipped particles will always develop in a universe with life. However they flip. It's a different universe every time. But life in it will be the same every time. Like that the gods can be entertained eternally.