The Limits of Science

[zaangalewa]

I used this expression in a poetic way that words are only placeholders for contents.

Then why the criticism when I do this? ... and why a Hilbert Space? ... and why a "placeholder"? ...

What is the element "language" in case of an Hilbertraum (German word) ... ah sorry: not "Hilber dream" but "Hilbert space" - for example?

Well, the complete set of gravity vectors described by Newton's Law would form a Hilbert Space ... but all the work perform values that are calculated from these gravity vectors do not form a Hilbert Space ... so my question: does Einstein's gravity tensors also form a Hilbert Space, and how are you defining tensor multiplication ...

... or are you just bullshitting us? ...

A paradigma of natural science is "The moon is in the sky also while no one is watching the moon." Do you agree with this statement?



Guter Mond, du gehst so stille
Durch die Abendwolken hin;
Deines Schöpfers weiser Wille
Hieß auf jener Bahn dich ziehn.
Leuchte freundlich jedem Müden
In das stille Kämmerlein!
Und dein Schimmer gieße Frieden
In’s bedrängte Herz hinein!

Guter Mond, du wandelst leise
An dem blauen Himmelszelt,
Wo dich Gott zu seinem Preise
Hat als Leuchte hingestellt.
Blicke traulich zu uns nieder
Durch die Nacht auf’s Erdenrund!
Als ein treuer Menschenhüter
Thust du Gottes Liebe kund!

Guter Mond, so sanft und milde
Glänzest du im Sternenmeer,
Wallest in dem Lichtgefilde
Hehr und feierlich einher.
Menschentröster, Gottesbote,
Der auf Friedenswolken thront:
Zu dem schönsten Morgenrothe
Führst du uns, o guter Mond!

Karl Enslin (1851)

 

[ReinyDays]

I do not use vector multiplications here.

Yes you are ... that's the whole point of a Hilbert Space ... I realize now you don't know what vector multiplication is ... and that you're using a Hilbert Space as a regular vector space ... which is fine, this information is taught to the students in a Hilbert Space ...

This sentence means verbally and/or philosophically that mathematics per se is not a language but is used from us as if it would be a language. But if I am right then you think mathematics is a language on its own.

It's a shame you are wrong ... this is the strawman, you admit I don't claim math IS a language, but then immediately condemn me for such a claim, that you admit I never made ... that makes you an asshole ...

Perhaps again a little inter mez-zo, a little "Gedanken-strich", a little "dash" : What do we do when we use [a] language? First of all: How do we do learn our "native" language? In a naive way: By singing and poems, isn't it? By formation of sounds and "rhymes" - elements which we repeat. Slowly we learn to combine our thoughts and emotions with sounds - while we learn the same time to feel and to think - and later we learn to represent this sounds with scribble. Indeed we learn with language nothing else than to speak and to read thoughts and emotions. We are telepaths - who use sounds and/or writing.

Bullshit ... "telepaths"? ... you've got to be kidding ... no, that's not how humans learn language ... at least you have no scientific evidence ...

So you say here you said something and I spoke about something else what you see as a hurting of rules how everyone has to think so you are able always to be right. What you do here is to transfer an English form of political discussion into science. But in science not exist winners and losers. Science follows the medical doctrine: "Who heals is right!".



I'm sure you are convinced 2+2=4. But when you have a rope with 2 nodes and another rope with two nodes and you knot them together - how many words - or how much pounds of language - did you need to do so? And what happens when you count the nodes now? Then suddenly 2+2=5. And this is true! But the part of mathemctis which is in the physis, in the reality, all around did not change - only our psychological view to a special "problem" in context of mathematics changed.

Right ... if you have four knots, then tie a fifth knot ... then you have 5 knots ... 2 + 2 + 1 = 5 ... if you can't add natural numbers, then how can you expect me to believe you can add in a Hilbert Space? ...

=====

What you've done is demonstrated how language can be twisted and distorted as to change the meaning of what was said ... language can be used for lies ...

Mathematics can't be twist or distorted into lies ... so it's not a language ... but if we wish for truth, then math can be used as language ... I've a feeling you don't know enough math to see this is true ... especially in physics ... if you think "2+2=5", then you can't solve the 2-body gravitation problem, now can you? ...

 

[zaangalewa]

C'mon. I've been using the JWST and the Bible as a tool to forecast what it will find in our universe.

The bible is a book and not a god. The bible was made from us to avoid confusion - some centuries after the Christian religion had been born.

You may be versed in what you discussed, but you have not been able to discuss what we'll find.

A conclusion out of this what I said here: Even if the universe would only be completelly predetermined and everything would follow a strict structure of causes and effects then we are nevertheless limited in our ways to get a ... hmmm ... an "individual" picture. But the universe is more: it exist for example also pure ramdom events within the universe.

While you may be able to do the math and equations with your toolsm such as in school, you don't seem to be using in to tell us your discoveries.

I found for example a kind of law about an extended form of parameters for aesthetics.

Are you like an accountant who just follows what his boss tells him to do?

Hmm ... Let me say it in this way: I am an idiot who speaks with idiots like you. Why knows only god.

Or do you use your tools to help you to discover our world like I do?

Primarily I do not discover the world. I am world. And from time to time I am in a strange situation in a strange world. Then I try to solve such problems.

 

[zaangalewa]

Bullshit ... "telepaths"? ... you've got to be kidding ...

You think damned loud from one continent to another, do you not think so?

 

[gtopa1]

I'm not saying this is true. I don't know. But, imagine, if there were a limit to how much of natural laws of The Universe we could perceive or understand?

I reached MY limmit about 1980. Quantum Mechanics did my head in. After that I preferred Economics and stuff. I also realised that Popper was as close as it gets to explaining what Science is. Can the Universe be both Chaotic and Predictable at the same time??

Greg

 

[zaangalewa]

Right ... if you have four knots, then tie a fifth knot ... then you have 5 knots ... 2 + 2 + 1 = 5 ... if you can't add natural numbers, then how can you expect me to believe you can add in a Hilbert Space? ...

If someones knots three ropes with 2+2+1 nodes then one will get a rope with 7 nodes. So 2+2+1=7 in this case. And I have not any idea what you call "add in a Hilbert space". A Hilbert space has an infinite number of dimensions.

 

[ReinyDays]

A paradigma of natural science is "The moon is in the sky also while no one is watching the moon." Do you agree with this statement?



Guter Mond, du gehst so stille
Durch die Abendwolken hin;
Deines Schöpfers weiser Wille
Hieß auf jener Bahn dich ziehn.
Leuchte freundlich jedem Müden
In das stille Kämmerlein!
Und dein Schimmer gieße Frieden
In’s bedrängte Herz hinein!

Guter Mond, du wandelst leise
An dem blauen Himmelszelt,
Wo dich Gott zu seinem Preise
Hat als Leuchte hingestellt.
Blicke traulich zu uns nieder
Durch die Nacht auf’s Erdenrund!
Als ein treuer Menschenhüter
Thust du Gottes Liebe kund!

Guter Mond, so sanft und milde
Glänzest du im Sternenmeer,
Wallest in dem Lichtgefilde
Hehr und feierlich einher.
Menschentröster, Gottesbote,
Der auf Friedenswolken thront:
Zu dem schönsten Morgenrothe
Führst du uns, o guter Mond!

Karl Enslin (1851)

Ah ... hell no ... not since Copernican ... the Moon is in orbit around the Earth, not in our sky ... from my post #35:

F = G (m1m2)/r^2 ...

This thread is about why this seemingly innocuous equation should cause so much grief for physicists for half a millenia ... I'm just pointing out some things
that are worse ... BTW, I have no idea what the below means, it's from fluid mechanics, and it's labeled as "Discrete Navier/Stokes Equation" and I have no reason to doubt that name ... enjoy:

This equation has no practical use ... can this even programmed into a computer? ... the math isn't helping us predict fluid motion ...

 

[zaangalewa]

I reached MY limmit about 1980. Quantum Mechanics did my head in. After that I preferred Economics and stuff. I also realised that Popper was as close as it gets to explaining what Science is. Can the Universe be both Chaotic and Predictable at the same time??

Yes. Chaos is perfectly predictable in a perfect world. But the perfect is not perfect.

Greg

The problem with the falsification method of Karl Popper: Normally no one makes the hypothese "The sky is green" and if someone makes this hypothese and falsifies it - what does this one win? The new hypothese the sky is red? And if he finds a hypothese in this context which no one is able to falsify - when do we decide that this is true what we are ¿still? not able to falsify? The sky is by the way indeed red because the scientists who found this out works always in the morning and the evening because daylight is not compatible with his instruments made by the company Drac&Frankenstein.

 

[zaangalewa]

Ah ... hell no ... not since Copernican ... the Moon is in orbit around the Earth, not in our sky ... from my post #35: ...

What is your problem? Drugs?

 

[ReinyDays]

What is your problem? Drugs?

Thank you for the ad homenim argument ... the last resort where you admit I'm right and have only my person to attack ...

 

[james bond]

The bible is a book and not a god. The bible was made from us to avoid confusion - some centuries after the Christian religion had been born.

The Christian God was the author of the Bible. That's how I can predict the universe as mature. The main point is evolution is wrong in terms of describing the universe.

What science taught me was the universe is expanding, so God continues to amaze us with his creation.

What about contraction? Can the universe contract? How would we know that was happening?

What heavenly bodies are being created?

 

[itfitzme]

In his book, "Three Body Problem", the author, Cixin Liu, discusses the fundamental limit of science as a matter of perspective. Theoretical physics has reached a point where our ability to observe The Universe is insufficient to prove, or disprove modern physics theories. He compares that limited perspective in the following examples:

When the members of the Frontiers of Science discussed physics, they often used the abbreviation “SF.” They didn’t mean “science fiction,” but the two words “shooter” and “farmer.” This was a reference to two hypotheses, both involving the fundamental nature of the laws of the universe.

In the shooter hypothesis, a good marksman shoots at a target, creating a hole every ten centimeters. Now suppose the surface of the target is inhabited by intelligent, two-dimensional creatures. Their scientists, after observing the universe, discover a great law: “There exists a hole in the universe every ten centimeters.” They have mistaken the result of the marksman’s momentary whim for an unalterable law of the universe.

The farmer hypothesis, on the other hand, has the flavor of a horror story: Every morning on a turkey farm, the farmer comes to feed the turkeys. A scientist turkey, having observed this pattern to hold without change for almost a year, makes the following discovery: “Every morning at eleven, food arrives.” On the morning of Thanksgiving, the scientist announces this law to the other turkeys. But that morning at eleven, food doesn’t arrive; instead, the farmer comes and kills the entire flock.


Cixin Liu, "Three Body Problem"

So scientists are like turkeys or two dimensional beings? And the shooter and farmer are God? And the turkeys and two dimensional beings made these observations over what period of time? Did the turkeys examine the area outside the farm? Would that area be like another parallel universe?

WTF is he talking about?

 

[itfitzme]

I'm not so sure. Right now, cosmological physics consists mostly of hypothetical energies and matters that cannot be proved or disproved, that cannot be detected or observed and serve merely as formulaic place holders.

Since Einstein's 1917 theoretical cosmology that required an undetectable cosmological constant, another 20 cosmological theories have been proposed. All of which require the existence of unprovable, theoretical matters and energies.

The state of modern theoretical physics in something like the old cartoon ...

View attachment 696382

So there is no electromagnetic force? No strong force and weak force? No gravity? Kinetic energy? Potential energy? Nuclear energy? These are the "hypothetical forces" you are referring to, right? These have physical units, you know, in base units of grams, meters, seconds.

"Hypothetical matter"? You mean, like the table in front of me? Silicon dioxide? Do grains of pollen not exhibit Brownian motion when suspended in water? What am I standing on, if not matter?

Huh?

 

[zaangalewa]

Thank you for the ad homenim argument ... the last resort where you admit I'm right and have only my person to attack ...

No no no no no no no: Read again what I said - and read what you said - and ask yourselve what you are doing on what reason. With philosophy and science has it not to do what you are doing. So tell me what are your intentions and your reasons to speak diametrically nonsense. For me it looks like you speak nonsense only on reason to speak nonsense. Do you think nonsense becomes true when everybody speaks the same nonsense?

 

[zaangalewa]

The Christian God was the author of the Bible.

That's wrong. God inspired what is written in textes of the bible.

That's how I can predict the universe as mature.

What a nonsense. You are a human being and you do not live outside of time like an angel for example.

The main point is evolution is wrong in terms of describing the universe.

This theme is a totally other theme. It has also a lot to do with the racism of the British colonialism - and also for example with the racism the Nazis - what makes "evolution" and "Darwinism" to a diffcult theme and sometimes even to a dangerous theme. But the real scientific theory of evolution is not any problem at all for Christians. You are an extremist US-American Christian and partially far from this what most Christians in the world believe - or try to believe. Nevertheless: Shepards and farmers always "knew" (in practice) what is evolution - since thousands of years when they did do what they learned from nature. The very most people in the bible had not been astonished about an idea like "biological evolution". Or do you really think Noah had been astonished about? And also Saint Francis and many many others through all history had not been astonished.

What science taught me was the universe is expanding, so God continues to amaze us with his creation.

Not really. When I heard - or found out - the first time in my life the universe expands from all points into all directions then it was clear to me that someone is able to travel through the universe and will always only be in the middle of the universe. My first thought after I did understand this had been: "Typically god to create a universe which has only centres!"

What about contraction? Can the universe contract? How would we know that was happening?

This is an old discussion. Currently most physicist "think" the universe is flat and will forever expand.

What heavenly bodies are being created?

Angels for example are creation. And indeed also the heaven(s) are creation. And Jesus "evolves" in the moment the heaven = He makes a home for us in heaven.

But what about first to live on Earth and to learn what it means to love here?

 

[ReinyDays]

No no no no no no no: Read again what I said - and read what you said - and ask yourselve what you are doing on what reason. With philosophy and science has it not to do what you are doing. So tell me what are your intentions and your reasons to speak diametrically nonsense. For me it looks like you speak nonsense only on reason to speak nonsense. Do you think nonsense becomes true when everybody speaks the same nonsense?

You used the term "Hilbert Space" ... when obviously you don't know what a Hilbert Space is ... which to me means you don't understand mathematics enough to judge my statements about its use to communicate ideas ... why pretend that you do? ...

This thread is about science, and it's in the "Science and Technology" forum ... if you want to discuss the philosophies involved, start a thread over in the "Philosophy" forum ...

If you don't know what the word "instantaneous" means in this context, then you don't understand the question in the OP ... you'll find solutions to these problems everyplace, but these are only average values ... not exact ... and this drives physicists fucking NUTS ... look what Einstein went through for Mercury's one lousy orbit extra per billion years ... [shakes head] ... physicists ... won't rest until Newton's n-body problem is solved ...

 

[zaangalewa]

You used the term "Hilbert Space" ...

Forget it. Read what I wrote and not what you "think".

 

[james bond]

That's wrong. God inspired what is written in textes of the bible.

Hahahahahaha, You are a minute little man.

What a nonsense. You are a human being and you do not live outside of time like an angel for example.

I predicted it knowing what I know and JWST just backed me up. Seeing is believing. OTOH, you don't know and can't figure out these things even with your knowledge.

This theme is a totally other theme. It has also a lot to do with the racism of the British colonialism - and also for example with the racism the Nazis - what makes "evolution" and "Darwinism" to a diffcult theme and sometimes even to a dangerous theme. But the real scientific theory of evolution is not any problem at all for Christians. You are an extremist US-American Christian and partially far from this what most Christians in the world believe - or try to believe. Nevertheless: Shepards and farmers always "knew" (in practice) what is evolution - since thousands of years when they did do what they learned from nature. The very most people in the bible had not been astonished about an idea like "biological evolution". Or do you really think Noah had been astonished about? And also Saint Francis and many many others through all history had not been astonished.

Yep, this is another failure of evolution or why it's called EVIL-ution. It caused people to kill and try to dominate others based on thinking they were of superior race vs. inferior race.

Not really. When I heard - or found out - the first time in my life the universe expands from all points into all directions then it was clear to me that someone is able to travel through the universe and will always only be in the middle of the universe. My first thought after I did understand this had been: "Typically god to create a universe which has only centres!"

Are you sure? I haven't given it much thought until you brought it up. It does appear that way and Hubble's Law states that we are expanding. But evenly?

Hubble's Law doesn't show that.

Anyway, I found an article that NASA says different -- Universe’s Expansion May Not Be The Same In All Directions. What do you think? Are you going to stick to being in the center of the universe if it doesn't expand equally?

This is an old discussion. Currently most physicist "think" the universe is flat and will forever expand.

No. We know it is expanding due to Hubble and his redshifts. The universe could stop and change directions in which it starts to collapse. They there would be a blueshift.

What could cause a collapse? The running out of energy to expand the universe.

 

[zaangalewa]

Hahahahahaha, You are a minute little man.

What's written in the bible is what human beings understood - or had been able to understand - when god spoke with them. But god did not stop to speak with human beings only because the books of the bible had been written. And if you like to understand the textes of the bible then you need a little more knowledge about the worlds wherein happens what's written in the bible. Fortunatelly I am not a theologist - but just yesterday I found for example out that an culture-anthropological idea - I never spoke about this idea with anyone else - had been wrong when I read that Moses saod "Why did you not kill the women?". So for me was this sentence in the bible worthful because it made for me more clear the education of the son of the pharao of Egypt compared with the soul of the Jews. For the very most people in the world such a sentence is only shocking. It had been by the way no women killed only because Moses said so.

I predicted it knowing what I know and JWST just backed me up.

What backed you up? You know nothing about the real future. No one knows. You know only your current expectation - and a prophecy is by the way nothing what has to be true. A prophecy shows a way. I remember someone got the order from god to warn the people and to leave a wrong way. They left this wrong way and the warner was dissapointed because god punished no one and another future came. But why should god be recentful or unforgiving? That's not the character of god. He loves his people and his childrern.

Seeing is believing. OTOH, you don't know and can't figure out these things even with your knowledge.

"Seeing" is one of the very most complex bio-psychological and culture-anthropological processes. I guess you have not any big idea what I know about the process "seeing" and I do not like to throw my "Buchenstäbchen" (=a modification of the German word for letters) now to enlighten you to try to start to understand what means the complexity "to see" for us. It's essential to do so - specially for the blind.

Yep, this is another failure of evolution or why it's called EVIL-ution. ...

Your own evil propaganda is not knowledge. Stop it to speak hateful nonsense in the name of Christ.

The rest of your message I wilL answer later.

 

[james bond]

What's written in the bible is what human beings understood - or had been able to understand - when god spoke with them. But god did not stop to speak with human beings only because the books of the bible had been written. And if you like to understand the textes of the bible then you need a little more knowledge about the worlds wherein happens what's written in the bible. Fortunatelly I am not a theologist - but just yesterday I found for example out that an culture-anthropological idea - I never spoke about this idea with anyone else - had been wrong when I read that Moses saod "Why did you not kill the women?". So for me was this sentence in the bible worthful because it made for me more clear the education of the son of the pharao of Egypt compared with the soul of the Jews. For the very most people in the world such a sentence is only shocking. It had been by the way no women killed only because Moses said so.



What backed you up? You know nothing about the real future. No one knows. You know only your current expectation - and a prophecy is by the way nothing what has to be true. A prophecy shows a way. I remember someone got the order from god to warn the people and to leave a wrong way. They left this wrong way and the warner was dissapointed because god punished no one and another future came. But why should god be recentful or unforgiving? That's not the character of god. He loves his people and his childrern.



"Seeing" is one of the very most complex bio-psychological and culture-anthropological processes. I guess you have not any big idea what I know about the process "seeing" and I do not like to throw my "Buchenstäbchen" (=a modification of the German word for letters) now to enlighten you to try to start to understand what means the complexity "to see" for us. It's essential to do so - specially for the blind.



Your own evil propaganda is not knowledge. Stop it to speak hateful nonsense in the name of Christ.

The rest of your message I wilL answer later.

Your words betray you. It says to me that you don't know about God and His words in the Bible. Anyway, that's your business. You didn't know what to expect from the exploration of the universe and probably disbelieved what JWST has shown based on your reaction.

My business here is to show the evidence of how science backs up what is written in the Bible. It states that God created mature Earth, humans and everything in it. The universe being all mature from the beginning backs that up. It means that science has backed up the Bible once more. Also, it's to discuss science, technology and everyday developments.

Finally, I can't help but conclude that evolution is a lie and to point it out when I read it. We do not see any young planets, moons, stars, etc. as predicted by the evolution scientists.