Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
Forum rules
Do not post support questions here. Before you post read the forum rules. Topics in this forum are automatically closed 30 days after creation.
Do not post support questions here. Before you post read the forum rules. Topics in this forum are automatically closed 30 days after creation.
- RollyShed
- Level 8
- Posts: 2436
- Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2019 8:58 pm
- Location: South Island, New Zealand
- Contact:
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
I thought trytip's story was too good to miss. Is this acceptable?
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
You seem to be anti-Sir Isaac Newton (I noticed at least on other comment about him/his ideas). I'm curious as to why.catweazel wrote:
In modern physics, quantum physics that is, not your clockwork universe Newtonian physics,...
(I'm not a scientist so take it easy on me. )
- Spearmint2
- Level 16
- Posts: 6900
- Joined: Sat May 04, 2013 1:41 pm
- Location: Maryland, USA
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
So is quantum mechanics. Takes a lot of a certain faith to believe in it.
All things go better with Mint. Mint julep, mint jelly, mint gum, candy mints, pillow mints, peppermint, chocolate mints, spearmint,....
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
Hi,
string?
maths have no domain here--even standard model formula gets routinely adjusted to fit our limited understanding.
string?
maths have no domain here--even standard model formula gets routinely adjusted to fit our limited understanding.
Everything in life was difficult before it became easy.
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
before i get kicked off this forum for language AGAIN here's some more info on this paradox. it was first created as a short story
it was later adapted as a movie:Robert A. Heinlein
" '—All You Zombies—' " is a science fiction short story by American writer Robert A. Heinlein. It was written in one day, July 11, 1958, and first published in the March 1959 issue of Fantasy and Science Fiction magazine after being rejected by Playboy. The story involves a number of paradoxes caused by time travel.
Predestination (2014)
For his final assignment, a top temporal agent must pursue the one criminal that has eluded him throughout time. The chase turns into a unique, surprising and mind-bending exploration of love, fate, identity and time travel taboos.
after watching this movie i'm left with more questions, but the movie pretty much stays on course with the short.
the main character is their own mother,father and child all at different stages of his/her life. i'm sure there are quite a few holes in this paradox, but do like the idea that this hasn't been explored in films, well besides Futurama animated movie Futurama: Bender's Big Score (2007) and a few of their tv epidodes.
a nice addition to these time travel films are Happy Death Day (2017) and it's sequel Happy Death Day 2U (2019) which are modern day groundhog day type films where time loops and alternate realities are subject.
as for Interstellar, i did not consider it to be a time travel movie at all. i never even considered giving it the Back to the Future criticism
- catweazel
- Level 19
- Posts: 9763
- Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 9:44 pm
- Location: Australian Antarctic Territory
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
I need to stop you right there. That an external reality exists is a mere assumption on your part, and nothing more. You do not have direct access to any reality other than your own internal reality. When you see something at a distance, say a tree, your brain is projecting a three-dimensional image that your consciousness focusses on. That image has been sent to the brain by a sense organ, it is a mediated image.
If you're going to spruik an 'external reality' then I'm going to have to ask you to prove that it exists.
"There is, ultimately, only one truth -- cogito, ergo sum -- everything else is an assumption." - Me, my swansong.
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
Just in case somebody else has to look it up:
Best thing I learned from this thread yet.spruik
/spruːk/
verb INFORMAL•AUSTRALIAN
- speak in public, especially to advertise a show.
"men who spruik outside striptease joints"- promote or publicize.
"the company forked out $15 million to spruik its digital revolution"
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
I can't, but I have to believe in an 'external reality' as otherwise I'd go stark raving crazy.
Our personal beliefs create a 'world' in which we can imagine that we're happy - or not - and mine allow me to imagine that I'm replying to someone who's half a world away.
Jon
PS. Dear Prof C Weazel, I'm still waiting for someone else to admit that 2 + 2 doesn't always equal 4 and that a triangle can have considerably less, or more, that 180 degrees.
- Pjotr
- Level 24
- Posts: 20086
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 10:18 am
- Location: The Netherlands (Holland) 🇳🇱
- Contact:
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
Take a hammer in your right hand and hit the index finger of your left hand with it. Hit it hard.
That should prove to you, once and for all, the existence of an external reality.
The fundamental problem of many philosophies is that they talk too much and adhere too much importance to words. Word play may be amusing to while away a long winter's evening, but it won't help you to deal with the undeniable external reality.
Tip: 10 things to do after installing Linux Mint 21.3 Virginia
Keep your Linux Mint healthy: Avoid these 10 fatal mistakes
Twitter: twitter.com/easylinuxtips
All in all, horse sense simply makes sense.
Keep your Linux Mint healthy: Avoid these 10 fatal mistakes
Twitter: twitter.com/easylinuxtips
All in all, horse sense simply makes sense.
- catweazel
- Level 19
- Posts: 9763
- Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 9:44 pm
- Location: Australian Antarctic Territory
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
No, it doesn't. Take away the sense of touch and one feels nothing at all.
"There is, ultimately, only one truth -- cogito, ergo sum -- everything else is an assumption." - Me, my swansong.
- Pjotr
- Level 24
- Posts: 20086
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 10:18 am
- Location: The Netherlands (Holland) 🇳🇱
- Contact:
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
Word play.... The finger will be damaged anyway, which should also be visible. Or should we take away sight as well, and claim that therefore nothing has happened?catweazel wrote: ⤴Mon Oct 28, 2019 5:33 amNo, it doesn't. Take away the sense of touch and one feels nothing at all.
Tip: 10 things to do after installing Linux Mint 21.3 Virginia
Keep your Linux Mint healthy: Avoid these 10 fatal mistakes
Twitter: twitter.com/easylinuxtips
All in all, horse sense simply makes sense.
Keep your Linux Mint healthy: Avoid these 10 fatal mistakes
Twitter: twitter.com/easylinuxtips
All in all, horse sense simply makes sense.
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
The point is that all we know about is observed data, but how that ties into actual reality is one of the issues quantum theories struggle with.
- Pjotr
- Level 24
- Posts: 20086
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 10:18 am
- Location: The Netherlands (Holland) 🇳🇱
- Contact:
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
OK, but the way that reality behaves in quantum theory, has no bearing at all on the strictly Newtonian reality level when dealing with hammers and fingers. It makes no sense to try to extrapolate quantum theory to our daily lives, because it has no effect on that hammer and that finger. When in the slightest doubt about that, feel free to apply the experiment I described on yourself.
Tip: 10 things to do after installing Linux Mint 21.3 Virginia
Keep your Linux Mint healthy: Avoid these 10 fatal mistakes
Twitter: twitter.com/easylinuxtips
All in all, horse sense simply makes sense.
Keep your Linux Mint healthy: Avoid these 10 fatal mistakes
Twitter: twitter.com/easylinuxtips
All in all, horse sense simply makes sense.
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
Actually to really understand it you need math chops. The problem with QM is that you simply can't explain it in ordinary language. There's nothing indeterminate about it, it's one of the most determinate theories we have.Spearmint2 wrote: ⤴Sun Oct 27, 2019 9:23 pmSo is quantum mechanics. Takes a lot of a certain faith to believe in it.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong - H. L. Mencken
- Mage of Maple
- Level 2
- Posts: 70
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2018 10:41 am
- Location: Maryland USA
- Contact:
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
This is a silly detour. Ok, maybe everything is a figment of my imagination - I can't prove it isn't. But if that's all this is, it invalidates all meaningful discussion. We reasonably assume that our perceptions correspond to an external reality. We take that as a given as we go about our day (and our science experiments.) Your solipsism doesn't add to the conversation, it just derails it.catweazel wrote: ⤴Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:41 am I need to stop you right there. That an external reality exists is a mere assumption on your part, and nothing more. You do not have direct access to any reality other than your own internal reality. When you see something at a distance, say a tree, your brain is projecting a three-dimensional image that your consciousness focusses on. That image has been sent to the brain by a sense organ, it is a mediated image.
If you're going to spruik an 'external reality' then I'm going to have to ask you to prove that it exists.
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
The world continues on whether or not people observe it because humans and their senses and instruments are not fundamentally different from the rest of the universe.Mage of Maple wrote: ⤴Sun Oct 27, 2019 2:05 pmWrong. Particles can interact with other particles without collapsing the wave function and destroying the interference pattern.Flemur wrote: ⤴Sun Oct 27, 2019 12:36 pm His point was that conscious observers are not necessary. Besides, bacteria react to their environment, like humans do: what else does "observing" consist of? In that old cat-box thought experiment the cat, the geiger-counter, the box and the air in the box, etc, etc are all "observers" in that they react to the environment, and that's why, in the real world, someone could open the box and figure out that the cat died two hours before the human observed anything, by measuring the cat's body temperature, etc. That would be true even if a regular cat were replaced by an unconscious cat or by something like a chemical which reacts to the gas.
I made no claims about measurement, I didn't even use the word.What constitutes a measurement? We don't know, but we do know that it is more complex they you claim.
Please edit your original post title to include [SOLVED] if/when it is solved!
Your data and OS are backed up....right?
Your data and OS are backed up....right?
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
You just assumed I exist, but maybe you're imagining that you're just talking to yourself.
Please edit your original post title to include [SOLVED] if/when it is solved!
Your data and OS are backed up....right?
Your data and OS are backed up....right?
- Spearmint2
- Level 16
- Posts: 6900
- Joined: Sat May 04, 2013 1:41 pm
- Location: Maryland, USA
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
In 3-D space, one could argue that it does, such as 4x180.and that a triangle can have considerably less, or more, that 180 degrees.
All things go better with Mint. Mint julep, mint jelly, mint gum, candy mints, pillow mints, peppermint, chocolate mints, spearmint,....
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
As 'space' may be flat even in 2-D space a triangle can still have more or less than 180 degrees, and does anyone actually know what 'shape' the universe is?Spearmint2 wrote: ⤴Mon Oct 28, 2019 8:52 amIn 3-D space, one could argue that it does, such as 4x180.and that a triangle can have considerably less, or more, that 180 degrees.
Jon
Re: Food for thought - debunking some folk-science
Although fairly unexpected all current indications point to it being flat or very nearly flat. And that, many are sorry to say, means triangles have exactly or almost exactly 180 degree angle-sums...