Re: Is physics really a matter of belief?

From: Eckard Blumschein (blumschein_at_et.uni-magdeburg.de)
Date: 11/18/04 

Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 12:38:23 +0100

On 11/18/2004 10:55 AM, Jim Greenfield wrote:
> "robert j. kolker" <nowhere@nowhere.net> wrote in message news:<3012jfF2q1q7sU1@uni-berlin.de>...

>> GR and SR are as consistent as the theory of real numbers. The both
>> predict a great number of effects correctly and neither have been
>> falsified experimentally.
>>
>> That being said there is a meta-belief that is held by scientists but
>> cannot be proved by scientists. The belief is that the laws of nature
>> (as stated in physics) are everywhere and for all time valid.

I merely hesitate to agree with "as stated in physics".
What about real numbers, we will perhaps agree that most things in
reality can be ascribed to merely positive numbers. You cannot really
have a negative coin in your hand while you might have a lot of abstract
debts. Elapsed time deos not need IR but merely IR+.

> There is
>> little choice in holding this belief. If one denies the uniformity of
>> nature, then a science such as physics is impossible.

No. Negative coins would not make finance more uniform. Hold on
believing in god if you strive to be Einstein-like. The somewhat related
believe in pre-existence of future time is not justifyable bu any
experiment. Science does definitely not benefit from it.

>
> That's the trouble! Science is in lalaland in its understanding of the
> universe.

Please chill down. Results of science have been changing the life of
everybody. I suppose, with universe you meant biology too. So I agree.
Full understanding of brain is still quite quite remote. The only
overdue correction I found out is teaching physics grammar.

Once again, please move to 'Painful but inevitable resignation', if
necessary.

Eckard Blumschein

Relevant Pages

  • The Landscape
    ... relevant to the recent thread on science fiction vs ... the constants of nature, by saying, "If they (the laws of physics) were ... what it says is straightforward: The universe is ... Another danger that some of my colleagues perceive, ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)
  • Science finds god ...part ii
    ... Duality has a parallel in quantum physics. ... whom science raises questions about ... science and religion will never be truly reconciled. ... Newton's carefully ordered universe. ...
    (talk.philosophy.misc)
  • Re: Should I Major in Geology
    ... > You missed astronomy Stuart, which is the biggest 'round' of all ... from the new way is that the only 'fact' in the universe ... Breaking down the barriers between physics, ... "This realization has broad implications for many fields of science, ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: funny creationsist
    ... demonstration of an occurence *within* the universe say anything about ... physics gets tossed out the door at the moment of the Big Bang or beyond the ... then please inform all of those science text manufacturers to ... As with all things in science, Jim, it is dependent upon our ability to test ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Chance or Design
    ... Because we have evidence for the existence of one, ... believe in a closed universe until he didn't. ... It is in general not acceptable, in science, to claim truth for any ... Take some physics classes and find out. ...
    (talk.origins)