Experts?who need 'em?
Nowt can beat a simple observation tha' nose
The logic that gave the World Brexit
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
Nowt can beat a simple observation tha' nose
The logic that gave the World Brexit
There is probably some right and wrong and maybe even a universal truth in this sketch which we could watch and discuss. Alternatively, and a better idea might be we just watch and consider that British society has never really changed since the 1960s.
Brainwashed into accepting a society structured in a particular way instead of believing it could and should be different. That is why Britain has been left behind by other more industrious and determined nations in the modern era. The two characters on the left in the sketch are of the classes responsible for both Britain's demise and the other character's poverty.
640x360_7916818072980074981.mp4
Tom
I left uni in 1975 so my knowledge of maths, physics and chemistry is dated as of that time.
Still, triangles are a definition, agreed between people who study Euclidean geometry. If you go one step further and assume that you only have curves between two points in space and/or your space has more than 3 dimensions then the triangle as we know it can't be defined in the same way. The way physics has developed in my time, it is very likely that we have more dimensions than space time.
Yes and no. This absolute zero is also an agreed hypothesis in thermodynamics based on our definition of enthalpy and entropy. We don't know for sure the structure of matter and what kinds of energy are left in matter at zero Kelvin. The science is still too young. One day we'll discover new subatomic particles and new fields that encompass the Higgs field, then the current theory on entropy, enthalpy will have to evolve.
this is only partially true, the lines vary with the atomic mass of the elements. I take it that you talk about spectra of hydrogen and elements that don't have isotopes. Further, they are only repeatable when acceleration is not present in your frame of reference, which restrict that 'truth' to earth-bound measurements.
the complexity of real systems will make everyone realize how little equipped we are to study these things, so we postulate and assume to simplify the number of variables, therefore we know in advance that whatever conclusion we come up with, the result of our experiments cannot be the whole truth.
Dammit, why did I waste so many years. Studying when the truth was that obvious.. lovelyExperts?who need 'em?
Nowt can beat a simple observation tha' nose
The logic that gave the World Brexit
My feelings exactly.
Unfortunately education, no matter how individually enlightening ,is inadequate to protect us from carefully orchestrated mass manipulation of the public into making harmful decisions that affect us all.
What is lacking is some form of social education as to the expectation and responsibilities of citizenship, sadly lacking in this country.
Last edited:
My point is about there being absolutes. Agreed the triangle is an agreed definition, which then allows an entire logic structure to be built in it.
My point about absolute zero as a thermodynamic concept, does provide the validity for the 4K radio noise, and is independent of any internal atomic mechanisms which may require the concept to be further refined, not modified but refined e.g getting closer to a truth. Remember that absolute zero was an experimental measurement before it was a theoretical construct.
My choice of atomic spectra, was made in the knowledge that it encompassed both pure uncompressed gases, high pressure gases, isotopes, Doppler and gravitational shifts and multiple elements, all of which give us objective tools to investigate the universe.
I would agree with you about the difficulties of modelling even relatively simple systems, let alone those we find in the real world. You might however be pleasantly surprised by the advances in computational modelling of physical systems over the last few decades.. not my area, but for instance the reason why nuclear test ban treaties, have been successful is because the modelling of yields had become so accurate.
My point, which I am unwilling to concede easily is that there are objective truths, and by science we get a glimpse of some of these and we make ourselves closer and closer to these by intelligent experimenation.
the problem with physics as an exact science is that we are physically earth bound while our imagination is not. It becomes clearer by the day that different regions of space may have different physical laws, different elements and possibly different atomic and subatomic particles.
if there is a universal truth in science then that is likely this postulate: the more I study, the less I know.
no. Occam's razor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor) is appealing to the mind but has no scientific basis.
Empirical evidence is useful but cannot replace reasoning.
the assumptions are not that many:
1. 1% of GDP in gross contribution to EU budget
2. The ever expanding role of the ECJ hurts our national pride
3. We cannot stop EU citizens to come and settle here
4. The EU is going to become the united states of Europe
well, at least I can now see how you came to support brexit...however,all paradigms are at heart phenomenological, all research is qualitative at first (i. e. phenomenological explication) and so everything begins with making human experience explicit. Even socratic reasoning was phenomenological.
we've gone some way from that qualitative > quantitative approach.
A. Einstein used thought experiments, not to explain observable phenomena, but his maths. So he built the theory first and imagine how it can be tested.
Einstein method is used a lot nowadays.
they are assumptions in the sense that the EU can change the rate of contribution, the role of the ECJ, the freedom of movement and whether it wants to build a superstate. At the moment, those are reasonable near term projections.
phenomenology remains the necessary connection between theory and experiment. Take dirac's equation which become the Pauli's equation in the phenomenology of coupling electrons in a magnetic field. Thought experiments are a starting point for what needs to be explicated.
no. 'the ecj hurt our national pride' is a nutty jingoistic bias that the sun would no doubt love to print on its front page. A premise - i.e. approximately valid proposition about reality - it emphatically is not.
Last edited:
Yes we are earth bound but with a boundless appetite
.. Is there any evidence that the laws of physics are different else where? There well may be additional elements like the unobtainium needed for the voyage to the centre of the earth... But likely also to be composed of neutrons and protons. There well may be additional effects which because of their weak forces , may matter over the enormous distances, but are not evident on earth. ... All of these are potentially exciting.
The more one knows, the more one realises that there is more to know...
I learned Schroedinger's first, then Pauli's, then Dirac's in that order.
I must say I have never paid much attention to any history connecting these three, just three sets of equations/theories in the same module following the increase in complexity and applicable scope. Dirac's is the most comprehensive and the most recent of the three.
the evidence seems to mount.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19429-laws-of-physics-may-change-across-the-universe/
the reason for it: the theory of relativity has evolved a lot since A. Einstein created it. It is possible that the laws of physics changed with space time.
I mentioned the Higgs field in a previous post, it's possible that Higgs constant and Planck's changed with space time.