Philosophy Now Forum

But it does so by the category... whether it's symbolic or a (proper) name.

I'd like to add my "thank you" as well! Great service, indeed! Cheers!

Out of 'I know nothing and my set is empty! Can you call illusions knowledge? I don't think so! What is it to know? I have absolutely no idea! To "know" has been assigned to me! Thanks, Russell, for pointing out the danger of having a single proposition of knowledge!' TL (I think this quot...

:roll: The Copenhagen Interpretation is indeed a set of (definite) requirements to the world of physics. I think you need to get sharper, you, mister or miss! :) [Edit, unsp.:] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_interpretation ... :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrg...

You about that... Apart from that, it should be noted that Schrödinger's Cat is much cited in relation to Schrödinger's theory/theories, but I hereby encourage people to investigate this themselves. Schrödinger's Cat is also not necessarily hypothetical, it may be that they have done it, one version...

I happen to agree to Popper, it seems. Thanks for the tip of the book!

If you still think I'm wrong show me your reference for Earth's "magnetic gravity" field. Not it's magnetic field and not it's gravity because they're different things. 2 urls: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_magnetic_field You're one sloppy a**, ...

I know you didn't see it in school because: there is no experiment that can demonstrate it; you've been unable to say what the experiment was; you have actually provided evidence that it can't be demonstrated experimentally. I know that magnetic fields exhibit a north and south pole. I'm not disput...

Quantum effects have already been mentioned on the thread but you said you'd seen the bending of light with magnetism in a school experiment and you didn't. What do you know about what I've seen in school experiments? You don't know jack* about that! Cut the crap! However, that aside, where's your ...

You should read the text!

My qualification is this: I have been reading Lee Smolin's "The Trouble With Physics" (by Penguin Group, 2006) and Roger Penrose's "The Road to Reality" (by Vintage Books, 2004). I have also studied physics all the way through upper high school, 3 years, for the Norwegian equival...

The earth's gravity does not have north and south poles. The earth's magnetic field has them. This is understood! And it is also my point that gravity of the Earth by its magnetic field can be redefined as either a combination of strong and weak interactions/forces or either of them. To say Earth's...

The earth's gravity does not have north and south poles. The earth's magnetic field has them. This is understood! And it is also my point that gravity of the Earth by its magnetic field can be redefined as either a combination of strong and weak interactions/forces or either of them. To say Earth's...

The earth's gravity does not have north and south poles. The earth's magnetic field has them. This is understood! And it is also my point that gravity of the Earth by its magnetic field can be redefined as either a combination of strong and weak interactions/forces or either of them. To say Earth's...

"Why we can (possibly) see the future?" By the projecting faculties of the mind in the mind AND not on the sky! Just the suggestion.