Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Community Forums
 General Discussion
 Experiment, evidence, and theory
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 05/25/2012 :  04:50:33  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Stolen from 3 Quarks Daily:


Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.

Edited by - HalfMooner on 05/25/2012 04:53:13

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9672 Posts

Posted - 05/25/2012 :  06:27:42   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Awesome in its simplicity.

Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 05/25/2012 :  08:04:57   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse

Awesome in its simplicity.
Yes! I think that "elegant" applies.

Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Go to Top of Page

ThorGoLucky
Snuggle Wolf

USA
1457 Posts

Posted - 05/25/2012 :  11:25:26   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit ThorGoLucky's Homepage Send ThorGoLucky a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Nice.

An additional level of complexity that could be added is extraneous/questionable evidence (pictured as dots in weird places).
Go to Top of Page

dreambacon
New Member

1 Post

Posted - 06/02/2012 :  21:33:37   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send dreambacon a Private Message  Reply with Quote
This is really interesting. It raises some questions for me though.

The evidence that you show is represented by dots, as if to indicate that each piece of evidence is a part of a whole. But evidence, which can amount to facts based on personal experience, is dependent both on time and how the mind-body observes what it sees. What I see today, I may see completely differently tomorrow and what I see today I may never see again; and just as the data gathered from an experiment depends on what tools were used to analyze and interpret the evidence, affecting the evidence to some degree, but hopefully a minimal degree that can be measured, if we change those tools we can receive completely different results, aka quantum physics. In other words, time is still a measure of how things relate to one another, just as all other characteristics of relating allow us to measure.

In this sense, your evidence would be limited to perceiving a certain fractal layer of reality (turtles all the way down) where the difference in evidence can be accounted for by re-calibrating accuracy and precision for different measurement tools? But if evidence can be viewed from different relative positions (fractals) with respect to other things because of the scope of time, perhaps by zooming in infinitely, the relationships with other things become different, therefore changing any preconceived evidence of how things relate. It would be like if you had a bearing and inside the bearing you had many layers of circles of balls that are the same size as you go to the center of the bearing. If you hold the middle of the bearing and move the outer ring, the balls will cause each other to rotate, but the balls in the middle rotate the slowest; for their reaction, they create an equal and opposite reaction in the other balls, however that reaction becomes relative in this case, depending on the circumferential layer in question. The balls towards the center of the bearing perform less revolutions compared to the outer balls. Their ability to relate to the other balls is slower, hence a slower implied time between them, hence Einstein and relativity and crap.
Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 06/03/2012 :  00:48:44   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Welcome to SFN, dreambacon!

Is what you are saying in effect that quantum physics (discovered through science) makes the universe immune to objective scientific analysis?

If so, I must say that I reject an anything-goes, all-perceptions-are-equally-valid approach to seeking truths about our universe, based upon a faddish distortion of quantum physics or not. I just got finished with a very brief post on (among other things) Dr. Andrew Weil's promotion of that woo-ridden, fake-quantum nonsense, and how it is death to good medicine, though a boon to quackery and his own corporate sales.

Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Go to Top of Page

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9672 Posts

Posted - 06/03/2012 :  02:45:32   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by dreambacon

In this sense, your evidence would be limited to perceiving a certain fractal layer of reality (turtles all the way down) where the difference in evidence can be accounted for by re-calibrating accuracy and precision for different measurement tools?
But it's not turtles all the way down. The world rests on the back of four elephants, which stands on the turtle. Very different entities which operates totally different from each other.
Only in very specific cases do our perceived reality intersect with quantum mechanics.



It would be like if you had a bearing and inside the bearing you had many layers of circles of balls that are the same size as you go to the center of the bearing. If you hold the middle of the bearing and move the outer ring, the balls will cause each other to rotate, but the balls in the middle rotate the slowest; for their reaction, they create an equal and opposite reaction in the other balls, however that reaction becomes relative in this case, depending on the circumferential layer in question. The balls towards the center of the bearing perform less revolutions compared to the outer balls.
Their ability to relate to the other balls is slower, hence a slower implied time between them, hence Einstein and relativity and crap.
Your understanding of ball bearings seems flawed. The the bearing only needs three components to work: the outer ring, the balls, the inner ring. If you set a bearing withit a bearing, you can pour locktite(tm) in the inner bearing, and the outer one will still work.

As for "hence Einstein and relativity and crap"... Don't let your inability to comprehend relativity and quantum mechanics be a reason to dismiss those theories. They are powerful models of how the universe works, and it has brought us such cool stuff as GPS-navigators and Terrabyte harddrives.

Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.08 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000