Re: Weinberg & Thomson Aether Physics

xxein_at_bellsouth.net
Date: 12/31/04


Date: 30 Dec 2004 19:23:57 -0800

xxein: We think and understand only what we think we understand. I
call that more of a belief rather than an awareness of the ultimate
physical reality. It only leads to an empiricism recognized by such a
belief and ignores other empirical constructions brought by different
belief.

Since none of us knows the ultimate physical reality (a TOE being
minimalized), we had better get used to eating crow rather than
pretending that we can exist on theory (belief) alone.

Oh, we are so smart! But tomorrow will be the same as today, right?
Physically, yes --- the laws won't change. What changes is our
awareness of the conditions and the conditions themselves. This is
exemplified by the history of "known" physics through the
retrospectivity of it all.

Almost all of us think we understand 'that' which we don't have a
'true' idea of (yet). We don't even know the difference between
'wheat' and 'chaff' of what we theorize. Empirics, anyone?

What we lack is the understanding that the event of a big bang (or big
whimper) is the same as the emission of a photon. The same laws are in
effect through the continuity of it all. Make it a bigger contrast or
smaller, it makes no difference. Continuity is the key.

It is fine that we look for the divisibility of continuity, but we put
too much faith into those little pockets where we find it. Our faith
(physical theory) is always guided by what we knew BEFORE new
discovery. Iow, we seem to have to put it into past/present contextual
thought for the idea of whether something is considerable or not. We
just don't know --- and to declare it non-sequiter or irrelevant is
never a reliable choice.

Sorry to wake you.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: GR ?
    ... |> | relationship between moving clock and stationary clocks, ... |> and have no basis in physical reality in the same way that Picassos ... |> | Just think of each application of ladder to doorway as a MEASUREMENT ... |> | fundamental theories of physics. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Quantum Entanglement question
    ... of physics themselves, so how can they measure infinite speed? ... as being a reflection of physical reality instead of being only ... The majority that follows the easy irrational path ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation
    ... > a mentaly unbalanced academic prig, ... So if I thought I knew "what God is", ... Physics detects actual physical reality. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: GR ?
    ... | not personal - they are standard to physics. ... will rewrite that phrase so it makes some relevent to physical reality ... under Special Relativity transformations between inertial frames, ... I would counter with you must stop engaginging in irelevent math that have ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation
    ... Physics detects actual physical reality. ... Hammond has discovered that sensory ... Why God is an invisible man ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)