The real comedy in that post was the claim that all Einstein ever did was invent one little equation, and was otherwise an overrated hack.
Is the Universe a quantum fluctuation?
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
The real comedy in that post was the claim that all Einstein ever did was invent one little equation, and was otherwise an overrated hack.
BidenPresident
Verified User
I think goat is mentally unstable.
BidenPresident
Verified User
Four schools
In the first decades of the twentieth century, three non-platonistic accounts of mathematics were developed: logicism, formalism, and intuitionism. There emerged in the beginning of the twentieth century also a fourth program: predicativism.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/philosophy-mathematics/#FouSch
That's always been a great question. A falling tree creates compressional pressure waves in the medium of air. But the "sound" we hear results from vibrations on our ear drums and converted into electrical impulses our brain interprets. Leaving open the question of whether the sound our mind interprets is really something out there in the real world, or just an interpretation of an electrical created in our brains
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
He has all the symptoms of a paranoid schizophrenic. He also claims to have earned a degree in psychology and worked in the field in an advisory or counseling capacity before his life fell apart for unknown reasons.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Agreed.
Note the difference a group of people hearing the sound of a rocket taking off and goat hearing voices telling him Bush blew up the World Trade Center. The group can all agree on the general sound of the rocket, but only goat can hear the voice(s) in his head.
Then entire point of the Scientific Method is verifiability; that something is "real" and not a misperception by one or a few people. The Cold Fusion fiasco is one example of the latter.
Saint Guinefort
Verified User
Understood. I know you get annoyed when anyone so much as challenges a point you made.
BidenPresident
Verified User
Like all authoritarians.
Saint Guinefort
Verified User
If only he could show some "synthesis" of the mass of information he takes in. It seems that his desires are fully met when he quotes something and no one is allowed to disagree.
It's like reading a book simply by skimming one's eyes over the text but never actually grokking what was described. That's why I like to challenge the points. Unfortunately it upsets him so much.
I guess the only acceptable response is "Yes, you are so right!" and to appreciate the huge amounts of stuff he "reads".
No, I don't generally like it when people hijack my thread to relentlessly parse a topic that has nothing to do with the OP, and I try to not do that to other people's threads.
You kept trying to conflate the reality of oranges with the reality of numbers.
Your original question was whether 2+2=4 was a real, inherent property of the universe.
Oranges are real. That's not the question you asked.
Numbers are not real. Numbers are a language or a rule we use to categorize the properties of things. Without humans those numbers disappear. Numbers are an expression of our experiences of the world.
Even more problematic is that there are infinitly more irrational numbers than integers. Integers barely register on the playing field of numbers. Since irrational numbers are an infinite series regress of decimals, they strictly are a product of the human mind. I don't think infinity exists as a natural reality, and we've seen no evidence it does. It only exists as a mathmatical conceptsl.
BidenPresident
Verified User
He has been doing this for years on this forum. I gave up on him. He would flunk out of a freshman survey class.
Saint Guinefort
Verified User
See? That's where you are wrong. But it appears you lack the requisite background in QM.
I find it ironic because you seem MASSIVELY well read. But I sense you don't actually SYNTHESIZE information.
You seem to feel like you are seeing so deeply but clearly you don't necessarily understand this particular topic in technical detail. Your points sound like so many new agers, who read something about quantum that is weird and who go off on a tangent decreeing so many deep things which don't necessarily have any meaning. You think you are asking deep questions but I'm challenging that assumption.
Don't get me wrong: I know I'm not that well versed in the intense mathematics of this topic, but you seem even less familiar. The point I raise is very much apropos. Even if YOU don't like it.
THIS TOPIC SPECIFICALLY, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle IS very much a MATHEMATICAL topic. As such to discuss it you MUST understand what the math is telling you. You cannot simply decree whatever new agey blather you like. It is a function of the MATH.
Even Russel started off with simple math and expanded off of it when writing Principia Mathematica.
Saint Guinefort
Verified User
He could certainly CITE things he's read and probably adequately repeat them as needed. That doesn't mean he's synthesizing it or understanding it.
I don't actually fault him for trying to go off on some pseudo philosophical tangent as he likes, but like new agers, just invoking Quantum Mechanics does not inherently open the floodgates to whatever woowoo one wants to paste onto it.
BidenPresident
Verified User
My study of Q.M. shows a world closer to the one I live in. The deterministic principle of classical physics never made sense to me.
Bro, you're getting good at avoiding my traps. Last year you'd pull anything out of Google's ass to be part of the conversation. Cypress is a fence sitter so he won't mention what field of mathematics quantum nothingness came out of. How could Tryon possibly know what the universe was like before the big bang? He writes about the absence of time in the universe but no one is willing to post his exact words. I bet it has something to do with gravity.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Thanks for the confession....not that I needed it to see you for who you are, COgoat.
You're a hateful person, that's easy to see. My curiosity is to find out why people become bitter, resentful losers.
For the most part, it's the standard: they are in pain. Either mental and/or physical.
Thanks for the confession....not that I needed it to see you for who you are, COgoat.
You're a hateful person, that's easy to see. My curiosity is to find out why people become bitter, resentful losers.
For the most part, it's the standard: they are in pain. Either mental and/or physical.
One good message board habit you have is identifying the sources of information you are pulling from, whether it be Wiki or other internet sources.
A lot of posters will frantically google for tidbits of information and then race back to the thread to pass it off as their own knowledge they supposedly worked diligently though school or self education to acquire.
Tryon did a pretty good job at explaining our universe before the big bang. That alone got the world interested in string theory. I watched it evolve over the last 30 years so I know we're headed for a universe without time. Too many physicists waiting for the official announcement.
Saint Guinefort
Verified User
You were caught frantically googling "Freezing Point Depression" which you didn't know about before. Then you lied about knowing the right answer even though you gave the wrong one.
You also like to quote MASSIVE amounts of other people's stuff without use of quotation marks. Usually it's only because you provide a link at the bottom that anyone can tell you aren't just plagiarizing. But I get it...you don't know how to quote people's work and you are a massive hypocrite.
That's what you did with regards to Freezing Point Depression. You and I both know it. (The hint was that you went directly to the entropic effect. You wanted to show off and appear smarter. Yes, it's true, it is related to entropy, but most people just refer to it as "freezing point depression". At least those people who have taken chemistry classes.
So you are a hypocrite and a liar. And you fancy yourself so smart. Too bad other people know more than you do.
Space-time is doomed
Nima Arkani-Hamed
Subatomic madness
In physics equations, time is used to keep track of the sequence of things as events unfold. But he has come to believe that organizing particle collisions according to "when" unnecessarily complicates the mathematics. Instead, he's experimenting with abstract geometric shapes that can describe events without using time.
Arkani-Hamed says that these shapes can't yet replace the idea of time, but he believes that at some point time itself will be supplanted by some other theory of what makes the Universe tick.
"It's unlikely to survive in the fundamental principles of an even deeper understanding of physics," he says.
https://www.npr.org/2022/12/16/1139... no sense of,expansion is stretching time too.
Nima Arkani-Hamed
Subatomic madness
In physics equations, time is used to keep track of the sequence of things as events unfold. But he has come to believe that organizing particle collisions according to "when" unnecessarily complicates the mathematics. Instead, he's experimenting with abstract geometric shapes that can describe events without using time.
Arkani-Hamed says that these shapes can't yet replace the idea of time, but he believes that at some point time itself will be supplanted by some other theory of what makes the Universe tick.
"It's unlikely to survive in the fundamental principles of an even deeper understanding of physics," he says.
https://www.npr.org/2022/12/16/1139... no sense of,expansion is stretching time too.