Simplicity as a Primary Condition of Nature and Evolution.

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

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
socratus
Posts: 628
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 7:00 am
Location: Israel
Contact:

Re: Simplicity as a Primary Condition of Nature and Evolution.

Post by socratus » Mon May 25, 2015 6:12 am

Obvious Leo wrote:I think we can safely forget about string theory at long last, socratus,
and its passing will go un-mourned. Smolin pulls no punches about his opinion of such nonsense
but throughout the community of physics the rats are deserting the sinking ship in droves.
Hardly anybody would define themselves as a string theorist nowadays and most of those
who formerly did are now claiming they never really meant it.
In terms of its scientific credibility string theory always ranked a long way behind "creation science".
Strictly for the fantasists only.
You are too hard.
Can you be a little softly to the "best brains in physics"?
They are only searching way out from darkness.
===

Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: Simplicity as a Primary Condition of Nature and Evolution.

Post by Obvious Leo » Mon May 25, 2015 6:36 am

socratus wrote:They are only searching way out from darkness.
If they want to find their way out of the darkness then they should try getting their heads out of their arses.

As you can see I'm not a "softly" kinda guy. Studying the philosophy of physics for a lifetime can do these things to a bloke.

Melchior
Posts: 839
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 3:20 pm

Re: Simplicity as a Primary Condition of Nature and Evolution.

Post by Melchior » Wed May 27, 2015 8:58 pm

Obvious Leo wrote:Greylorn. The philosophy of physics has been my life's work and I'm an old fart so don't underestimate me. I know what physics is and I also know what evolution is because evolution towards informational complexity is the fundamental self-organising principle of the universe itself.
Really now, is that so?
However evolution is not the spatio-temporal phenomenon you imagine it to be. Evolution is a PROCESS and processes are purely temporal phenomena which require no spatial extension in the absence of an observer of them. If you wish to disagree then by all means do so but I caution you that I stand ready to wipe the floor with any pulpit pronouncements attesting to your genius. In a philosophy forum one is expected to substantiate one's opinion with reasoned argument. If you reckon you're up for it, bring it on, as they say in the popular culture.
How silly of me not to know this!

User avatar
socratus
Posts: 628
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 7:00 am
Location: Israel
Contact:

Re: Simplicity as a Primary Condition of Nature and Evolution.

Post by socratus » Thu May 28, 2015 1:40 pm

socratus wrote:
socratus wrote:
Greylorn Ell wrote:You began with a good notion and quickly fucked it up.

Look for "functional" simplicity rather than arbitrary simplicity.
A 2D universe cannot produce functional elements (like eyes and neurons).
If you were truly looking for geometrical simplicity you'd start with a 1D
(and equally useless) universe.

Greylorn
Greylorn think : 1-D is simpler than 2-D.
The answer.
The 1-D figure is explained by "theory of string-particle".
The result is written in the book "The trouble with Physics" by Lee Smolin.
#
Other wrote: a triangle is simpler than circle.
The answer.
The triangle has angles.
To create angles needs some kind of forces.
Without forces every flat geometrical figure would change into circle.
==..
Once again,
The 1-D (line with Planck's length but without thickness) is explained
by "theory of string-particle". Theorists try to understand 1-D string in 11-D.
The result is written in the book "The trouble with Physics" by Lee Smolin.
In the others words:
Where is Alice?
Alice is in the 1-D String, at 11-D Wonderland.
===…
More details.
=.
Other wrote: a triangle is simpler than circle.
The argument.
To make a triangle is needed to apply force at three different locations.
To make a circle is needed to apply force at all locations.
Therefore " a triangle is simpler than circle."
The refutation.
To apply " force at all locations " means that the particle
is in an equilibrium state . . . . in relax state . . . in potential state.
The equilibrium is primary state of particle.
To change equilibrium needs forces.
For example:
To create line (string) needs forces in two different directions.
To create triangle needs forces in three different directions. . . . etc
Without forces every flat particle will change into a symmetrical
equilibrium - circle state: c/d=pi=3,14 . . . .
==….

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Simplicity as a Primary Condition of Nature and Evolution.

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Thu May 28, 2015 2:16 pm

socratus wrote:Simplicity as a Primary Condition of Nature and Evolution.
=.
The evolution of Nature is going from simple to complex therefore
I will take the simplest physical parameters in order to explain
the primary conditions of evolution in Nature.
1.
The simplest reference frame is two dimensions (2D).
There are two kinds of 2D: Euclidian (relative) and
Pseudo-Euclidian (absolute according to SRT).
What Euclidian 2D is - everybody knows.
What Pseudo-Euclidian (negative - 2D) is - nobody knows.
In my opinion (- 2D) is Zero Vacuum reference frame: T= - 273,15 . . . . .
2.
In this simplest negative reference frame (- 2D) only flat - circle
particles can exist: c/d = 3,14 . . . . and they are the simplest original /
primary quantum particles of Nature.
3.
These quantum particles in their simplicity contain their own
inner – natural power / energy and impulses: h and h*=h/2pi.
4.
These particles obey "the law of conservation and transformation energy".
This law is not book-keeper's calculations of "debit – credit".
This law means:
the simplest particles can keep and somehow transform their energy.
=.
Only on these simplest physical parameters (T= - 273,15 . . , c/d = 3,14 . . . ,
h and h*=h/2pi ) and "the law of conservation and transformation energy"
can be constructed the reliable castle for Quantum theory.
==..
More than 300 years ago Newton wrote:
" For the basic problem of philosophy seems to be to discover
the forces of nature from the phenomena of motions
and then to demonstrate the other phenomena from these forces."
This Newton's offer is carried out fully in Quantum physics.
==...
From the state of Simplicity was created and evolved
the complex World of Matter, Consciousness, Knowledge.
==..
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus.
==..
You made your first mistake at step 1.
2D is not simple in any sense. It is a human conceit that is not found in nature. And only emerged very late in biological evolution with the advent of intelligence.
It does not predate, nor does it produce or create the "complex world of matter". Rather it comes from knowledge and consciousness which is thus far our highest example of consciousness.

User avatar
socratus
Posts: 628
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 7:00 am
Location: Israel
Contact:

Re: Simplicity as a Primary Condition of Nature and Evolution.

Post by socratus » Thu May 28, 2015 2:39 pm

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
socratus wrote:Simplicity as a Primary Condition of Nature and Evolution.
=.
The evolution of Nature is going from simple to complex therefore
I will take the simplest physical parameters in order to explain
the primary conditions of evolution in Nature.
1.
The simplest reference frame is two dimensions (2D).
There are two kinds of 2D: Euclidian (relative) and
Pseudo-Euclidian (absolute according to SRT).
What Euclidian 2D is - everybody knows.
What Pseudo-Euclidian (negative - 2D) is - nobody knows.
In my opinion (- 2D) is Zero Vacuum reference frame: T= - 273,15 . . . . .
2.
In this simplest negative reference frame (- 2D) only flat - circle
particles can exist: c/d = 3,14 . . . . and they are the simplest original /
primary quantum particles of Nature.
3.
These quantum particles in their simplicity contain their own
inner – natural power / energy and impulses: h and h*=h/2pi.
4.
These particles obey "the law of conservation and transformation energy".
This law is not book-keeper's calculations of "debit – credit".
This law means:
the simplest particles can keep and somehow transform their energy.
=.
Only on these simplest physical parameters (T= - 273,15 . . , c/d = 3,14 . . . ,
h and h*=h/2pi ) and "the law of conservation and transformation energy"
can be constructed the reliable castle for Quantum theory.
==..
More than 300 years ago Newton wrote:
" For the basic problem of philosophy seems to be to discover
the forces of nature from the phenomena of motions
and then to demonstrate the other phenomena from these forces."
This Newton's offer is carried out fully in Quantum physics.
==...
From the state of Simplicity was created and evolved
the complex World of Matter, Consciousness, Knowledge.
==..
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus.
==..
You made your first mistake at step 1.
2D is not simple in any sense. .
You are correct :
"2D is not simple in any sense." . . . . because it can create "virtual particles"
===

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Simplicity as a Primary Condition of Nature and Evolution.

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Thu May 28, 2015 3:47 pm

socratus wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
socratus wrote:Simplicity as a Primary Condition of Nature and Evolution.
=.
The evolution of Nature is going from simple to complex therefore
I will take the simplest physical parameters in order to explain
the primary conditions of evolution in Nature.
1.
The simplest reference frame is two dimensions (2D).
There are two kinds of 2D: Euclidian (relative) and
Pseudo-Euclidian (absolute according to SRT).
What Euclidian 2D is - everybody knows.
What Pseudo-Euclidian (negative - 2D) is - nobody knows.
In my opinion (- 2D) is Zero Vacuum reference frame: T= - 273,15 . . . . .
2.
In this simplest negative reference frame (- 2D) only flat - circle
particles can exist: c/d = 3,14 . . . . and they are the simplest original /
primary quantum particles of Nature.
3.
These quantum particles in their simplicity contain their own
inner – natural power / energy and impulses: h and h*=h/2pi.
4.
These particles obey "the law of conservation and transformation energy".
This law is not book-keeper's calculations of "debit – credit".
This law means:
the simplest particles can keep and somehow transform their energy.
=.
Only on these simplest physical parameters (T= - 273,15 . . , c/d = 3,14 . . . ,
h and h*=h/2pi ) and "the law of conservation and transformation energy"
can be constructed the reliable castle for Quantum theory.
==..
More than 300 years ago Newton wrote:
" For the basic problem of philosophy seems to be to discover
the forces of nature from the phenomena of motions
and then to demonstrate the other phenomena from these forces."
This Newton's offer is carried out fully in Quantum physics.
==...
From the state of Simplicity was created and evolved
the complex World of Matter, Consciousness, Knowledge.
==..
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus.
==..
You made your first mistake at step 1.
2D is not simple in any sense. .
You are correct :
"2D is not simple in any sense." . . . . because it can create "virtual particles"
===
Rubbish. 2D is not real in any meaningful sense. It is a human conceit.
The universe can be measured spatially. QED the universe is not 2D.
Case Closed.

Melchior
Posts: 839
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 3:20 pm

Re: Simplicity as a Primary Condition of Nature and Evolution.

Post by Melchior » Thu May 28, 2015 3:49 pm

I think you are quite mad, Socratus.
Last edited by Melchior on Thu May 28, 2015 4:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Simplicity as a Primary Condition of Nature and Evolution.

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Thu May 28, 2015 3:50 pm

Melchior wrote:I think you are quite mad.
Madness comes when comments are directed at no one in particular.
Try using the "quote" function to direct your thoughts at specific people.
You might like to give a reason for your thought otherwise its nothing but an empty insult.

Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: Simplicity as a Primary Condition of Nature and Evolution.

Post by Obvious Leo » Thu May 28, 2015 9:38 pm

Hobbes' Choice wrote:Rubbish. 2D is not real in any meaningful sense. It is a human conceit.
Of course it is. 2D is a space and spaces are mathematical objects, not physical ones. 3D space is no different, as Leibniz tried so hard to tell everybody. The great Persian philosopher/mathematicians knew all about spaces, and although European science imported their tools from the Persians they neglected to import the important philosophy of spaces which was designed to go with them. I guess the cloistered monks in their seclusion felt they needed no instruction in philosophy from a bunch of godless heathen when they had Aquinas to tell them what was what.

Mathematicians and physicists use many different kinds of spaces as reference frames within which they can model certain procedures of thought, which they do with a range of different symbols, placeholders, and other abstract entities. These various abstractions, together with the abstract spaces in which they are applied, collectively form a system of symbolic logic which we generically know as mathematics. This is a rather misleading sort of term because there are a range of different kinds of mathematics which are used to model a range of different procedures of thought.

Since Newton there has been a tendency in science to conflate the abstract symbols which it uses with the underlying truths of nature for which these symbols are being used as descriptive tools. The Persians would have regarded this as a grave metaphysical error, as would have the Pythagoreans if it comes to that. Or Leibniz or Kant or Spinoza or Russell or Peirce or Whitehead or Lao Tsu. Perhaps even the pre-Socratics would have raised a sceptical eyebrow at such a conflation, although this is rather uncertain because these guys didn't really have any mathematics.

The Persians taught us that mathematics cannot be used to model the truths of nature. Mathematics can only be used to model a pre-defined narrative about the truths of nature, a narrative which in the modern parlance is often called a paradigm.When science conflates the map with the territory in this way it unwittingly conflates its paradigm with truth and for the past century this has led to much confusion in the science of physics. This confusion actually dates all the way back to Newton but it was monstrously exacerbated by the insights of Albert Einstein. Newton did what no Persian mathematician would ever have done. Newton modelled his procedure of thought in the 3D space of Rene Descartes and immediately accorded this abstract entity a real and physical ontology. Ever since that time Newton's pre-defined narrative about the truths of nature has slowly but surely burrowed its way into the minds of all the generations who followed him.

We have all been tainted by this flawed narrative and to excise it from our minds is no conceptual bargain in a post star-trek world. However it is most certainly flawed because this narrative describes a universe which makes no sense. What is it? What is so badly wrong with Newton's so exquisitely painted portrait of our universe? The answer to this question is a truth which lies hidden in plain sight. So bloody obvious is this truth that nearly all of the philosophers and poets in history have spoken of nothing else. So bloody obvious is this truth that each of us knows it instinctively within our innermost selves. The elephant in the room of physics is that TIME PASSES.

In our Newtonian confusion we have allowed ourselves to compose a narrative in our minds of the universe as a PLACE, in accordance with Newton's procedure of thought and his subsequent ontologising of the Cartesian space. However the universe exists as a place only in our minds and nowhere else and thus the Cartesian space is a mathematical abstraction which doesn't physically exist. The real universe is an EVENT because reality is that which is continuously coming into existence all around us, exactly as it appears to be. Sometimes we just can't see the wood for the trees and seek to find complications where no complications exist but the fact is that the most fundamental truth of the universe is blindly bloody obvious.

The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.

From “The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam”

User avatar
HexHammer
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 8:19 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: Simplicity as a Primary Condition of Nature and Evolution.

Post by HexHammer » Thu May 28, 2015 9:45 pm

OP is pure nonsense

Organs are extremely complex, immune system is extremely complex, human brains are EXTREMELY complex.

Cameleons and some squids/octopus (Cephalopods) are extremely complex in their ability skin-coloring alteration and can change shape.

So, you don't really have any idea what you are talking about.

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Simplicity as a Primary Condition of Nature and Evolution.

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Thu May 28, 2015 10:42 pm

Obvious Leo wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:Rubbish. 2D is not real in any meaningful sense. It is a human conceit.
Of course it is. ”
Thanks for agreeing.

2D can only describe AREA not SPACE.

Even a circle on a page requires a third dimension to accommodate the thickness of the ink on the paper.

Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: Simplicity as a Primary Condition of Nature and Evolution.

Post by Obvious Leo » Thu May 28, 2015 11:27 pm

Hobbes' Choice wrote:Even a circle on a page requires a third dimension to accommodate the thickness of the ink on the paper.
And a circle is not a "thing". A circle is only an idea about a "thing". If I put your page drawing of a circle on top of my upright piano it's not even a circle anymore. If I squat down a little and look lengthways down the top of my piano your circle has become an ellipse. It's "circle-ness" is merely a property of my observation of it.

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Simplicity as a Primary Condition of Nature and Evolution.

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Thu May 28, 2015 11:37 pm

Obvious Leo wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:Even a circle on a page requires a third dimension to accommodate the thickness of the ink on the paper.
And a circle is not a "thing". A circle is only an idea about a "thing". If I put your page drawing of a circle on top of my upright piano it's not even a circle anymore. If I squat down a little and look lengthways down the top of my piano your circle has become an ellipse. It's "circle-ness" is merely a property of my observation of it.
Yes, a human conceit. What do you think I have been trying to say for 3 or 4 posts?

Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: Simplicity as a Primary Condition of Nature and Evolution.

Post by Obvious Leo » Thu May 28, 2015 11:56 pm

Hobbes' Choice wrote:Yes, a human conceit. What do you think I have been trying to say for 3 or 4 posts?
I'm in furious agreement with you and just showing a bit of solidarity because I regard this as a profoundly important point of mathematical philosophy. Our mathematical conceits can tell us nothing about the nature of the physical world because they can only model our mental narrative of this world.

For example we were all taught in high school that the sum of the internal angles of a triangle must always add up to 180 degrees. Well this is absolute bollocks because this all depends on where you draw the fucking thing.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests