The Limits of Science

How does science work? And what's all this about quantum mechanics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Kuznetzova
Posts: 583
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: The Limits of Science

Post by Kuznetzova »

skakos wrote: You take for granted the opinion of someone else that I am a troll?
Based on what?
Based on this 24-page pointless, directionless thread?

skakos wrote: Do you really claim that anyone not having the same level of ignorance you have concerning science and its assumptions must be a troll?
Then you turn around and troll him right in front of us.

skakos wrote: Your post has been reported.

Come back to the discussion whenever you feel you have an argument.
Combative. {*} (check)

Inflammatory. {*} (check)

I see you are familiar with chapter 4 of the Internet Trolling Handbook.
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12314
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: The Limits of Science

Post by Arising_uk »

Kuznetzova wrote:...
Yes, you can use the discipline of mathematics to bait philosophers and drag them into a troll-baited net and ensnare them. In the innards of math, "truth" is literally , in all ways, equal to the construction of a proof that shows a theorem follows from premises. That's dry and `mechanical` to philosophers, but it is absolutely the case in practice. (philosophers prefer their "truth" to be enigmatic, ephemeral, difficult, and sexy. Within math, truth is none of those things.).
Where do you get this nonsense idea from? Logic is the Philosophers topic as are formal axiomatic systems, so no, you can't bait philosophers with such stuff and neither do they think truth to be 'enigmatic, ephemeral, difficult, and sexy' with respect to such systems. Unless of course you are talking about weeb 'philosophers' who by-and-large haven't bothered to study philosophy and at best are essentially pre-philosophers.
Another topic which can be used to bait and trap philosophers is the topic of Intuitionistic Logic. I saw a troll use it to explosive effect on newsgroups in the 1990s. He even dragged me into a 30-post back-and-forth thread before I realized what he was doing. Just like you have done, he never outwardly announced that he was using arguments from Intuitionistic Logic, because he carefully calculated that he was interacting with people who had never heard of it. Just as you have done with non-euclidean geometry in this very thread. You are using tactics from the first chapter of the Internet Trolling Handbook (I'm speaking metaphorically).
Then he wasn't talking to philosophers of any note and if he was using Intuitionistic Logic then he had at least studied Logic to some depth, so not a troll.
So go ahead, skakos. Report my posts whenever you like, to whomever you like. I will repeat exactly what I have said here to them. Go ahead. Be my guest.
I'd be bored if I was a mod and received yet more blather about 'trolls' this 'trolls' that, given this is a philosophy site and the idea of a 'troll' is pretty much pointless in such a subject.
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12314
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: The Limits of Science

Post by Arising_uk »

Kuznetzova wrote:
skakos wrote: You take for granted the opinion of someone else that I am a troll?
Based on what?
Based on this 24-page pointless, directionless thread?
Which you are adding to?
Felasco
Posts: 544
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2012 12:38 pm

Re: The Limits of Science

Post by Felasco »

Based on this 24-page pointless, directionless thread?
Upon what evidence did you expect anything other?
Blaggard
Posts: 2246
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 9:17 pm

Re: The Limits of Science

Post by Blaggard »

It's the law of forums that any thread longer than about 20 pages (it's not an exact science so don't quote me on this) must turn into a meandering stream of consciousness style babble to its inevitable demise at page 100 when someone decides to stop posting stuff about cucumber chutney and the existential nature of marmalade or in fact any purveyor therein of confit based products, because people stopped listening 25 pages ago when the point was made that space monkeys are biscuits on the toes of the cheese wizards and that in fact you were Hitler hence.
User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5594
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: The Limits of Science

Post by SpheresOfBalance »

There is no necessary accounting for meaninglessness amongst peoples interest, as surely all are at different avenues of exploration, to assert anything else is short sighted, merely a testament of ones singular perspective, of no real universal consequence.
User avatar
skakos
Posts: 287
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 7:22 pm
Location: Athens, Greece
Contact:

Re: The Limits of Science

Post by skakos »

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
skakos wrote:
SpheresOfBalance wrote:[Analysis works only if you know that the whole is just the sum of its parts.
Yes, but the math can sometimes be more complicated than any man is capable of understanding!

But this is almost never the case.
Not at all, from my perspective.

Does water have the properties of oxygene and hydrogen combined?
Yes, as it can have no other! The properties are in fact those of combining hydrogen and oxygen as with the formula H2(subscripted)O.

Is human just a sum of cells and innanimate matter?
Exactly that, and nothing more, though specifically organized in such a way!

Surely no...
Then surely you're god fearing, believing in magic, and other things never seen, only of one's imagination.

Scientists say they believe that Ezekiel was epileptic, I wonder how many bible writers were schizophrenic? Or maybe eating some magic mushrooms.
You seem to be so certain about many things which have baffled philosophers for centuries.
Do you have any proof to back these dogmas up?
Do you understand that you claim you have the solution for problems long unresolved?
That is called dogmatism.
First, only if I'm wrong is it dogmatism, as surely as your dogmatism is that no one then can know, because neither you, nor anyone you know, does.
Second, in essence, you asked if things are the sum of their parts, and that is exactly true, everyone knows that, I thought. All that anything can be, is the totality of it's constituents, whatever it's constituents may be and thus the electrochemical process's that result, over time!
No, not everything is the sum of its parts.
Does water have the properties of oxugene and hydrogene combined?
User avatar
skakos
Posts: 287
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 7:22 pm
Location: Athens, Greece
Contact:

Re: The Limits of Science

Post by skakos »

Felasco wrote:
Based on this 24-page pointless, directionless thread?
Upon what evidence did you expect anything other?
Any discussion must be made with arguments.
Not with personal attacks.
Using personal attacks and characterizations just shows the emptyness of your thought.
Keep up the good work in doing so. :wink:
User avatar
skakos
Posts: 287
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 7:22 pm
Location: Athens, Greece
Contact:

Re: The Limits of Science

Post by skakos »

Kuznetzova wrote:
skakos wrote: You take for granted the opinion of someone else that I am a troll?
Based on what?
Based on this 24-page pointless, directionless thread?

skakos wrote: Do you really claim that anyone not having the same level of ignorance you have concerning science and its assumptions must be a troll?
Then you turn around and troll him right in front of us.

skakos wrote: Your post has been reported.

Come back to the discussion whenever you feel you have an argument.
Combative. {*} (check)

Inflammatory. {*} (check)

I see you are familiar with chapter 4 of the Internet Trolling Handbook.
Any discussion must be made with arguments.
Not with personal attacks.
Using personal attacks and characterizations just shows the emptyness of your thought.
Keep up the good work in doing so. :wink:
User avatar
skakos
Posts: 287
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 7:22 pm
Location: Athens, Greece
Contact:

Re: The Limits of Science

Post by skakos »

Blaggard wrote:It's the law of forums that any thread longer than about 20 pages (it's not an exact science so don't quote me on this) must turn into a meandering stream of consciousness style babble to its inevitable demise at page 100 when someone decides to stop posting stuff about cucumber chutney and the existential nature of marmalade or in fact any purveyor therein of confit based products, because people stopped listening 25 pages ago when the point was made that space monkeys are biscuits on the toes of the cheese wizards and that in fact you were Hitler hence.
It is also the law of forums that one should not feel obliged to write into a thread he finds boring or not interesting.
Simple, yet so hard to understand... :wink:
User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5594
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: The Limits of Science

Post by SpheresOfBalance »

First skakos wrote, then:
SpheresOfBalance wrote:In Blue
skakos wrote:Analysis works only if you know that the whole is just the sum of its parts.
Yes, but the math can sometimes be more complicated than any man is capable of understanding!

But this is almost never the case.
Not at all, from my perspective.

Does water have the properties of oxygene and hydrogen combined?
Yes, as it can have no other! The properties are in fact those of combining hydrogen and oxygen as with the formula H2(subscripted)O.

Is human just a sum of cells and innanimate matter?
Exactly that, and nothing more, though specifically organized in such a way!

Surely no...
Then surely you're god fearing, believing in magic, and other things never seen, only of one's imagination.

Scientists say they believe that Ezekiel was epileptic, I wonder how many bible writers were schizophrenic? Or maybe eating some magic mushrooms.
Then Skakos responded, then so did SOB:
SpheresOfBalance wrote:
skakos wrote:You seem to be so certain about many things which have baffled philosophers for centuries.
Do you have any proof to back these dogmas up?
Do you understand that you claim you have the solution for problems long unresolved?
That is called dogmatism.
First, only if I'm wrong is it dogmatism, as surely as your dogmatism is that no one then can know, because neither you, nor anyone you know, does.
Second, in essence, you asked if things are the sum of their parts, and that is exactly true, everyone knows that, I thought. All that anything can be, is the totality of it's constituents, whatever it's constituents may be and thus the electrochemical process's that result, over time!
Then Skakos, then SOB:
SpheresOfBalance wrote:
skakos wrote:No, not everything is the sum of its parts.
Does water have the properties of oxugene and hydrogene combined?
Yes it does, as those properties that water has is due to the combination of Oxygen and Hydrogen, of the ratio required. You are simply saying that your list of properties are incomplete, such that you cannot sense such things, which has nothing to do with it. Just like elements are combined to become a compound, so the properties are combined, to become. That you don't fully understand, the why and how of the math, the combination, is neither here nor there, bearing no reflection on the fact. In fact, water is the combination of hydrogen and oxygen. Do you know about valance electrons, especially when it comes to hydrogen's instability, while Helium, only one electron more is stable, a noble gas, contained in a child's balloon, that one can breath and talk like a duck?

Humans really confuse me, that they believe, their lack of knowledge, has any bearing, as to the truth, as to any particular universal matter. They don't fully understand how something works, so they say it can't, yet they are not the ones that did it, the universe did. Does anyone know of the truth of the entire universe? Not now, maybe much, much, much later, they might! Lets call it the arrogance of mans ignorance.
User avatar
skakos
Posts: 287
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 7:22 pm
Location: Athens, Greece
Contact:

Re: The Limits of Science

Post by skakos »

Thanks for the reply Shperes of Balance.
Will reply as soon as I can. :)
User avatar
skakos
Posts: 287
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 7:22 pm
Location: Athens, Greece
Contact:

Re: The Limits of Science

Post by skakos »

SpheresOfBalance wrote:First skakos wrote, then:
SpheresOfBalance wrote:In Blue
skakos wrote:Analysis works only if you know that the whole is just the sum of its parts.
Yes, but the math can sometimes be more complicated than any man is capable of understanding!

But this is almost never the case.
Not at all, from my perspective.

Does water have the properties of oxygene and hydrogen combined?
Yes, as it can have no other! The properties are in fact those of combining hydrogen and oxygen as with the formula H2(subscripted)O.

Is human just a sum of cells and innanimate matter?
Exactly that, and nothing more, though specifically organized in such a way!

Surely no...
Then surely you're god fearing, believing in magic, and other things never seen, only of one's imagination.

Scientists say they believe that Ezekiel was epileptic, I wonder how many bible writers were schizophrenic? Or maybe eating some magic mushrooms.
Then Skakos responded, then so did SOB:
SpheresOfBalance wrote:
skakos wrote:You seem to be so certain about many things which have baffled philosophers for centuries.
Do you have any proof to back these dogmas up?
Do you understand that you claim you have the solution for problems long unresolved?
That is called dogmatism.
First, only if I'm wrong is it dogmatism, as surely as your dogmatism is that no one then can know, because neither you, nor anyone you know, does.
Second, in essence, you asked if things are the sum of their parts, and that is exactly true, everyone knows that, I thought. All that anything can be, is the totality of it's constituents, whatever it's constituents may be and thus the electrochemical process's that result, over time!
Then Skakos, then SOB:
SpheresOfBalance wrote:
skakos wrote:No, not everything is the sum of its parts.
Does water have the properties of oxugene and hydrogene combined?
Yes it does, as those properties that water has is due to the combination of Oxygen and Hydrogen, of the ratio required. You are simply saying that your list of properties are incomplete, such that you cannot sense such things, which has nothing to do with it. Just like elements are combined to become a compound, so the properties are combined, to become. That you don't fully understand, the why and how of the math, the combination, is neither here nor there, bearing no reflection on the fact. In fact, water is the combination of hydrogen and oxygen. Do you know about valance electrons, especially when it comes to hydrogen's instability, while Helium, only one electron more is stable, a noble gas, contained in a child's balloon, that one can breath and talk like a duck?

Humans really confuse me, that they believe, their lack of knowledge, has any bearing, as to the truth, as to any particular universal matter. They don't fully understand how something works, so they say it can't, yet they are not the ones that did it, the universe did. Does anyone know of the truth of the entire universe? Not now, maybe much, much, much later, they might! Lets call it the arrogance of mans ignorance.
You keep insisting on something which is beyond obvious.
Oxygene and hydrogene are gases. Is water a gas too?
Come on...

And this is the first and most obvious different that came to my mind.

If humans were just the sum of their cells, then we would be nothing more than "bags of meat and blood".
Can you really uphold to such an opinion without ignoring everything spiritual which makes us who we are?
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 10768
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Post by henry quirk »

"bags of meat and blood"

As distasteful as that seems to you: that's exactly what each of us are.

Organic masses with a peculiar and particular kind of complexity.

To make any other claim invites the call for 'evidence' of "everything (anything!) spiritual".

Anecdotes will not suffice...suspicions are unacceptable.

Passion is not evidence...belief is not evidence.
User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5594
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: The Limits of Science

Post by SpheresOfBalance »

First skakos wrote, then:
SpheresOfBalance wrote:In Blue
skakos wrote:Analysis works only if you know that the whole is just the sum of its parts.
Yes, but the math can sometimes be more complicated than any man is capable of understanding!

But this is almost never the case.
Not at all, from my perspective.

Does water have the properties of oxygene and hydrogen combined?
Yes, as it can have no other! The properties are in fact those of combining hydrogen and oxygen as with the formula H2(subscripted)O.

Is human just a sum of cells and innanimate matter?
Exactly that, and nothing more, though specifically organized in such a way!

Surely no...
Then surely you're god fearing, believing in magic, and other things never seen, only of one's imagination.

Scientists say they believe that Ezekiel was epileptic, I wonder how many bible writers were schizophrenic? Or maybe eating some magic mushrooms.
Then Skakos responded, then so did SOB:
SpheresOfBalance wrote:
skakos wrote:You seem to be so certain about many things which have baffled philosophers for centuries.
Do you have any proof to back these dogmas up?
Do you understand that you claim you have the solution for problems long unresolved?
That is called dogmatism.
First, only if I'm wrong is it dogmatism, as surely as your dogmatism is that no one then can know, because neither you, nor anyone you know, does.
Second, in essence, you asked if things are the sum of their parts, and that is exactly true, everyone knows that, I thought. All that anything can be, is the totality of it's constituents, whatever it's constituents may be and thus the electrochemical process's that result, over time!
Then Skakos, then SOB:
SpheresOfBalance wrote:
skakos wrote:No, not everything is the sum of its parts.
Does water have the properties of oxugene and hydrogene combined?
Yes it does, as those properties that water has is due to the combination of Oxygen and Hydrogen, of the ratio required. You are simply saying that your list of properties are incomplete, such that you cannot sense such things, which has nothing to do with it. Just like elements are combined to become a compound, so the properties are combined, to become. That you don't fully understand, the why and how of the math, the combination, is neither here nor there, bearing no reflection on the fact. In fact, water is the combination of hydrogen and oxygen. Do you know about valance electrons, especially when it comes to hydrogen's instability, while Helium, only one electron more is stable, a noble gas, contained in a child's balloon, that one can breath and talk like a duck?

Humans really confuse me, that they believe, their lack of knowledge, has any bearing, as to the truth, as to any particular universal matter. They don't fully understand how something works, so they say it can't, yet they are not the ones that did it, the universe did. Does anyone know of the truth of the entire universe? Not now, maybe much, much, much later, they might! Lets call it the arrogance of mans ignorance.
Then skakos, then SOB
SpheresOfBalance wrote:
skakos wrote: You keep insisting on something which is beyond obvious.
Oxygene and hydrogene are gases. Is water a gas too?
Come on...

And this is the first and most obvious different that came to my mind.

If humans were just the sum of their cells, then we would be nothing more than "bags of meat and blood".
Can you really uphold to such an opinion without ignoring everything spiritual which makes us who we are?
No, I took Chemistry in college, did you? Define sum as it pertains to atoms and molecules, there you shall find your answer, it's called chemistry. The number of protons and neutrons in the nucleus, and the corresponding valance electrons circling it, moving between layers. So is it spirituality that is the difference between all the matter in the universe? The difference between Iron and Hydrogen is just the number of protons, neutrons, and electrons, and then of course electromagnetic force. Sure it challenges the mind, that, that's all it is. Is there more? Could it be spirituality?

To fully understand it, it seems to be more than that doesn't it, which is where the cutting edge of particle physics comes in. And lets face it, how could you and I effectively argue that which is at the cutting edge of particle physics, unless we were two of the scientists of opposing view, blazing that trail? So it's moot. I'll parrot one scientist, while you parrot another, neither of us knowing for sure, as we're not actually conducting the experiments. There are forces in the universe, where they come from is up for grabs, still, we'll have to be patient and wait, lest we die first. :(

Don't get me wrong, I'm agnostic, and can see it going either way, but surely not biblical. The difference between you and I is that I support that which feeds me, science! You on the other hand, would seem to only be a selective believer in science, only that which helps you plead your case. I have to believe that all scientists are "equally" seeking the "actual" truth of things, and not only when it appeases me. Which is not to say that I don't believe they get it wrong sometimes.
Post Reply