The Paradox of Physics

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

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

The Paradox of Physics

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

In observing atoms we affect atoms***:

1. The tool used to form atoms is in itself composed of atoms.

2. The atoms of the tool affect the atoms that are being observed as the tool creates the boundaries through which the atoms are observed.

3. An experiment is atoms affecting atoms and creates a self referential loop where the properties of the atoms are the result of the atoms we use to observe them.

4. There is no rule for how and what tool we use (i.e. a composition of atoms) thus the process of observing contains within it an element of irrationality and randomness.

5. The observation of atoms is an observation of our own irrationality and randomness.


***The term "atom" can be replaced with "particle" or "electron" or "neutron", etc.
alan1000
Posts: 312
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 10:03 am

Re: The Paradox of Physics

Post by alan1000 »

Oh, for heaven's sake. The "Douanier Rousseau" approach may work well enough in modern art, but when you going to study some science and mathematics?
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6592
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: The Paradox of Physics

Post by Iwannaplato »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Jun 02, 2023 8:37 pm In observing atoms we affect atoms***:

1. The tool used to form atoms is in itself composed of atoms.

2. The atoms of the tool affect the atoms that are being observed as the tool creates the boundaries through which the atoms are observed.

3. An experiment is atoms affecting atoms and creates a self referential loop where the properties of the atoms are the result of the atoms we use to observe them.

4. There is no rule for how and what tool we use (i.e. a composition of atoms) thus the process of observing contains within it an element of irrationality and randomness.

5. The observation of atoms is an observation of our own irrationality and randomness.


***The term "atom" can be replaced with "particle" or "electron" or "neutron", etc.
What's the paradox?

And as far as
4. There is no rule for how and what tool we use (i.e. a composition of atoms) thus the process of observing contains within it an element of irrationality and randomness.
Could you explain that?
There are rules for the protocols. There are patterns in what is considered a successful experiment and what is not?

How do you explain the successes of physics? Or do you see none? Is it chance? You're communicating on tech based on the results of physics.
User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 752
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: The Paradox of Physics

Post by Cerveny »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Jun 02, 2023 8:37 pm In observing atoms we affect atoms***:

1. The tool used to form atoms is in itself composed of atoms.

2. The atoms of the tool affect the atoms that are being observed as the tool creates the boundaries through which the atoms are observed.

3. An experiment is atoms affecting atoms and creates a self referential loop where the properties of the atoms are the result of the atoms we use to observe them.

4. There is no rule for how and what tool we use (i.e. a composition of atoms) thus the process of observing contains within it an element of irrationality and randomness.

5. The observation of atoms is an observation of our own irrationality and randomness.


***The term "atom" can be replaced with "particle" or "electron" or "neutron", etc.
In a way, you are right about something. "Self-referential loops and permanently influencing mutual relations in the microworld are the essence of its undulations and oscillations, the permanent search for stability (wave / quantum mechanics)...
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The Paradox of Physics

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Iwannaplato wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2023 1:54 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Jun 02, 2023 8:37 pm In observing atoms we affect atoms***:

1. The tool used to form atoms is in itself composed of atoms.

2. The atoms of the tool affect the atoms that are being observed as the tool creates the boundaries through which the atoms are observed.

3. An experiment is atoms affecting atoms and creates a self referential loop where the properties of the atoms are the result of the atoms we use to observe them.

4. There is no rule for how and what tool we use (i.e. a composition of atoms) thus the process of observing contains within it an element of irrationality and randomness.

5. The observation of atoms is an observation of our own irrationality and randomness.


***The term "atom" can be replaced with "particle" or "electron" or "neutron", etc.
What's the paradox?

And as far as
4. There is no rule for how and what tool we use (i.e. a composition of atoms) thus the process of observing contains within it an element of irrationality and randomness.
Could you explain that?
There are rules for the protocols. There are patterns in what is considered a successful experiment and what is not?

How do you explain the successes of physics? Or do you see none? Is it chance? You're communicating on tech based on the results of physics.
1. We observe order through tools but there is no rule as to how or what may be a tool and a tool is necessary.

2. The success of physics is merely an interpretation as success is fundamentally a subjective opinion. We observe things and from this observation further observations occur. However there is no rule as to the starting point of any observation thus an element of chance occurs. Observations, and there following observations, just occur spontaneously. The laws of physics just 'appear' in the respect that the rules that guide physics come from variations in previous philosophies which led to the appearance of modern science. These variations are spontaneous and these variations in the philosophies/knowledge over the previous years are responsible for what we know. There is no predictability in variation, it just occurs, and variation is necessary for knowledge progression.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The Paradox of Physics

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

alan1000 wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2023 12:46 pm Oh, for heaven's sake. The "Douanier Rousseau" approach may work well enough in modern art, but when you going to study some science and mathematics?
And when are you going to actually apply a thoughtful argument, or are you just going to accept the status quo without question?
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The Paradox of Physics

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Cerveny wrote: Mon Jul 24, 2023 6:00 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Jun 02, 2023 8:37 pm In observing atoms we affect atoms***:

1. The tool used to form atoms is in itself composed of atoms.

2. The atoms of the tool affect the atoms that are being observed as the tool creates the boundaries through which the atoms are observed.

3. An experiment is atoms affecting atoms and creates a self referential loop where the properties of the atoms are the result of the atoms we use to observe them.

4. There is no rule for how and what tool we use (i.e. a composition of atoms) thus the process of observing contains within it an element of irrationality and randomness.

5. The observation of atoms is an observation of our own irrationality and randomness.


***The term "atom" can be replaced with "particle" or "electron" or "neutron", etc.
In a way, you are right about something. "Self-referential loops and permanently influencing mutual relations in the microworld are the essence of its undulations and oscillations, the permanent search for stability (wave / quantum mechanics)...
The fact that things result in a self referentiality leads to a further paradox of disorder and order. On one hand the self-referential nature of things results in a perpetually stable loop relative to other self-referential things. On the other hand if all there is at the macro level is a loop then the loop has no compare, as there is no comparison for the grand totality, thus there is no loop as comparison is necessary for order. Order thus occurs at the relative level but is not the grand absolute.
Gary Childress
Posts: 7966
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: The Paradox of Physics

Post by Gary Childress »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 10:12 pm
Iwannaplato wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2023 1:54 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Jun 02, 2023 8:37 pm In observing atoms we affect atoms***:

1. The tool used to form atoms is in itself composed of atoms.

2. The atoms of the tool affect the atoms that are being observed as the tool creates the boundaries through which the atoms are observed.

3. An experiment is atoms affecting atoms and creates a self referential loop where the properties of the atoms are the result of the atoms we use to observe them.

4. There is no rule for how and what tool we use (i.e. a composition of atoms) thus the process of observing contains within it an element of irrationality and randomness.

5. The observation of atoms is an observation of our own irrationality and randomness.


***The term "atom" can be replaced with "particle" or "electron" or "neutron", etc.
What's the paradox?

And as far as
4. There is no rule for how and what tool we use (i.e. a composition of atoms) thus the process of observing contains within it an element of irrationality and randomness.
Could you explain that?
There are rules for the protocols. There are patterns in what is considered a successful experiment and what is not?

How do you explain the successes of physics? Or do you see none? Is it chance? You're communicating on tech based on the results of physics.
1. We observe order through tools but there is no rule as to how or what may be a tool and a tool is necessary.

2. The success of physics is merely an interpretation as success is fundamentally a subjective opinion. We observe things and from this observation further observations occur. However there is no rule as to the starting point of any observation thus an element of chance occurs. Observations, and there following observations, just occur spontaneously. The laws of physics just 'appear' in the respect that the rules that guide physics come from variations in previous philosophies which led to the appearance of modern science. These variations are spontaneous and these variations in the philosophies/knowledge over the previous years are responsible for what we know. There is no predictability in variation, it just occurs, and variation is necessary for knowledge progression.
In order to tame the universe for humans, physicists must become tame themselves. The search for ultimate knowledge and the power to carry out that search ultimately changes the universe.
User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 752
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: The Paradox of Physics

Post by Cerveny »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 10:19 pm
Cerveny wrote: Mon Jul 24, 2023 6:00 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Jun 02, 2023 8:37 pm In observing atoms we affect atoms***:

1. The tool used to form atoms is in itself composed of atoms.

2. The atoms of the tool affect the atoms that are being observed as the tool creates the boundaries through which the atoms are observed.

3. An experiment is atoms affecting atoms and creates a self referential loop where the properties of the atoms are the result of the atoms we use to observe them.

4. There is no rule for how and what tool we use (i.e. a composition of atoms) thus the process of observing contains within it an element of irrationality and randomness.

5. The observation of atoms is an observation of our own irrationality and randomness.


***The term "atom" can be replaced with "particle" or "electron" or "neutron", etc.
In a way, you are right about something. "Self-referential loops and permanently influencing mutual relations in the microworld are the essence of its undulations and oscillations, the permanent search for stability (wave / quantum mechanics)...
The fact that things result in a self referentiality leads to a further paradox of disorder and order. On one hand the self-referential nature of things results in a perpetually stable loop relative to other self-referential things. On the other hand if all there is at the macro level is a loop then the loop has no compare, as there is no comparison for the grand totality, thus there is no loop as comparison is necessary for order. Order thus occurs at the relative level but is not the grand absolute.
Just a note: "loops" laid down in time are waves, and waves can be understood as a compromise between order and chaos...
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The Paradox of Physics

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Gary Childress wrote: Sun Aug 13, 2023 1:33 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 10:12 pm
Iwannaplato wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2023 1:54 pm
What's the paradox?

And as far as

Could you explain that?
There are rules for the protocols. There are patterns in what is considered a successful experiment and what is not?

How do you explain the successes of physics? Or do you see none? Is it chance? You're communicating on tech based on the results of physics.
1. We observe order through tools but there is no rule as to how or what may be a tool and a tool is necessary.

2. The success of physics is merely an interpretation as success is fundamentally a subjective opinion. We observe things and from this observation further observations occur. However there is no rule as to the starting point of any observation thus an element of chance occurs. Observations, and there following observations, just occur spontaneously. The laws of physics just 'appear' in the respect that the rules that guide physics come from variations in previous philosophies which led to the appearance of modern science. These variations are spontaneous and these variations in the philosophies/knowledge over the previous years are responsible for what we know. There is no predictability in variation, it just occurs, and variation is necessary for knowledge progression.
In order to tame the universe for humans, physicists must become tame themselves. The search for ultimate knowledge and the power to carry out that search ultimately changes the universe.
To observe something through a tool is to change it as the tool applies boundaries to what is observed and these boundaries result in change. Every time we measure something we change it. Physics is an expression of our own psychology.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The Paradox of Physics

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Cerveny wrote: Mon Aug 14, 2023 11:53 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 10:19 pm
Cerveny wrote: Mon Jul 24, 2023 6:00 pm
In a way, you are right about something. "Self-referential loops and permanently influencing mutual relations in the microworld are the essence of its undulations and oscillations, the permanent search for stability (wave / quantum mechanics)...
The fact that things result in a self referentiality leads to a further paradox of disorder and order. On one hand the self-referential nature of things results in a perpetually stable loop relative to other self-referential things. On the other hand if all there is at the macro level is a loop then the loop has no compare, as there is no comparison for the grand totality, thus there is no loop as comparison is necessary for order. Order thus occurs at the relative level but is not the grand absolute.
Just a note: "loops" laid down in time are waves, and waves can be understood as a compromise between order and chaos...
Thus the wave is order and chaos as one?
User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 752
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: The Paradox of Physics

Post by Cerveny »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2023 8:51 pm
Cerveny wrote: Mon Aug 14, 2023 11:53 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 10:19 pm

The fact that things result in a self referentiality leads to a further paradox of disorder and order. On one hand the self-referential nature of things results in a perpetually stable loop relative to other self-referential things. On the other hand if all there is at the macro level is a loop then the loop has no compare, as there is no comparison for the grand totality, thus there is no loop as comparison is necessary for order. Order thus occurs at the relative level but is not the grand absolute.
Just a note: "loops" laid down in time are waves, and waves can be understood as a compromise between order and chaos...
Thus the wave is order and chaos as one?
Waves can be seen as the result of negotiations, compromises between chaos and order...
viewtopic.php?p=591279#p591279
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: The Paradox of Physics

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Cerveny wrote: Sat Aug 19, 2023 10:23 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2023 8:51 pm
Cerveny wrote: Mon Aug 14, 2023 11:53 am
Just a note: "loops" laid down in time are waves, and waves can be understood as a compromise between order and chaos...
Thus the wave is order and chaos as one?
Waves can be seen as the result of negotiations, compromises between chaos and order...
viewtopic.php?p=591279#p591279
And this unity of opposites occurs through 'negotiation' with this 'negotiation' having its contrasting opposite of 'non-negotation' that allows it to stand apart....we are still dependent upon contradiction if anything is to be defined as one thing must stand apart from another and this requires a dualism. Because we require contradiction in order to define things then we can state that things just spontaneously appear and with this spontaneity comes randomness.
Atla
Posts: 6607
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: The Paradox of Physics

Post by Atla »

Cerveny wrote: Mon Jul 24, 2023 6:00 pm In a way, you are right about something. "Self-referential loops and permanently influencing mutual relations in the microworld are the essence of its undulations and oscillations, the permanent search for stability (wave / quantum mechanics)...
Why would the universe search for stability?
User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 752
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: The Paradox of Physics

Post by Cerveny »

Atla wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 9:21 pm
Cerveny wrote: Mon Jul 24, 2023 6:00 pm In a way, you are right about something. "Self-referential loops and permanently influencing mutual relations in the microworld are the essence of its undulations and oscillations, the permanent search for stability (wave / quantum mechanics)...
Why would the universe search for stability?
So that it can last over time…
Post Reply