[ Long ] A Philosophy of Science v. Pseudo-Science

Post Reply New Topic

I have a tip for whoever wants to keep smearing science at this point: take advantage of the way the metre is currently defined, by having the second already defined and assigning an exact numerical value to the speed of light. Deride physicists for being so arbitrary and conclude that, if they can do that, then you can give the speed of light any other value; e.g., a nice and convenient one like zero.

Also, you shouldn’t miss the opportunity to point out how inherently evil the SI is, most of the world’s population having already been brainwashed into using it. Only US Customary Units can save you, but first you have to get back their true nature, because the worldwide conspiracy of science has already managed to get them defined in terms of the SI. This has to be reversed!

I’m surprised I haven’t seen young-Earth creationists comment on this yet, because many of them claim the speed of light has decreased immensely during the history of the Universe. How can you rely on something so shaky to define your units of measurement?

So David now that you have had time to let this sink in, do you accept that E=MC2 is on of the most rigorously tested formulas we have and it therefore valid. Regarding the photon it is a has a wavelength and and Zero mass, its energy is derived using Plank's constant. Which brings me to my next question do you accept that we can determine the energy of a photon using E = hc / λ

Reading and comprehension are skills sadly lacking among the Zealotry.

I said make one of the VARIABLES =0.

And how fast relative to what must a PROTON travel to have it's mass?

Let's all chill out, or I'll ask to have this thread closed.

I don't care who's to blame or who said what to whom.

Wow I had no idea the rules here give the op ownership of a thread.

David is just being david it would appear that he cannot debate without insults, if this thread was to be closed, then so will all threads with his input.

So David I think we have arrived at your fundamental issue with modern physics. You do not agree with e=mc2 or more accurately you see the fact that protons have no mass as where the equation falls down. You cannot understand why it is that C is more correctly stated as the speed of massless particles. Am I correct?

They do not (rules giving ownership to the author of the OP), and he was the last one to insult the intelligence of Oldavid by suggesting he flunked Algebra.

Personal insults are child's play, and the absolute lowest level of critical thinking, no matter how old the dude or dudette is they come from, or how young for that matter..

Yup, it's the pot calling the Kettle Black, if I've got that metaphor correct..

Oh GOD, I'm glad I did not accept that offer to be a moderator here.

Seriously, it appears that SOME people do not even know what a personal character attack is or is not, OR THE FACT THAT IT IS ANTI-THETICAL TO CIVIL DISCOURSE AND way out bounds for any level of practical debate.

THIS IS Not a WELL place for a moderator to retain mental health, I'm afraid, as some of the history shows here, and Not NOW, to be clear..

THERE IS Good NEUTRAL HUMAN BEING-LIKE moderation here now, TG.

And oh what a blessing that is TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, in all the colors and forms that comes in, FREE.

But still for the life of me, it's hard for me to figure out why folks around here constantly personally attack people, like it does something for the frigging discourse around here but frigging hate and discontent.

Hmm.. I guess SOME folks thrive off of that with lack of a better way of communication in civil discourse, and any chance of practical debate, at all, instead.

No. I do not "see the fact that protons have no mass" at all. Protons have a mass that is some 1800-odd times that of an electron.

I am not even thoroughly convinced that photons have no mass either.
Speed, if it is to have any value at all, is a function of distance and time. Makes a problem for the Einsteinean version of Relativity, I think.

Oh and back on topic, Science is great but never enough to discuss philosophy, as obviously science does not have the tools TO measure the inner emotional and sensory experience of human being that is core to Philosophy, Religion, and even Politics, 101, for that matter, as Political science surely cannot fully exist, without the emotionalism that drives all of politics and is never a human experiment that can be repeated by the rigorous strict measures of the scientific method that is good at objective stuff but absolutely atrocious at the subjective mind of human mind and body in balance, as well as the Universe that is each unique human being in total emotional and sensory life that no two humans share equally in their unique views of a Universe unto itself, perceived by a unique sentient being that is each unique human being, as one.

In fact, it is impossible to understand politics, philosophy, or religion fuller without this human 101, cognitive and affective empathy stuff well gifted, employed, utilized and practiced to get life, the way it is that the scientific method will never repeat for any two unique humans, as is.

And not surprisingly, rarely is this core element of PPR discussed here, I guess; as, as far as I know I am the first one who has ever brought it up here.

BUT oh GOD, it is the 8000LB Gorilla, or whatever, in this entire forum, for sure.

And I can only guess, it is also the reason, for all these silly personal attacks that I have been empirically measuring here for the last 4 years, or so, just for fun, out of curiosity and amusement, I guess, as SOME OF the same folks who are proclaiming they know how to debate and are so dam smart, are often the worst offenders, at this lowest level of critical thinking, in any level of civil discourse or debate.

Yes, there is more to life than facts.

In fact, there is life more than facts.

And that is precisely why the scientific method WILL NEVER EVER SUFFICE TO MEASURE OR DISCUSS, EITHER, P,P, OR R, AT LEAST FULLY, AS IT COULD, WITHOUT IT HERE, for sure.

Call it pseudo-science or whatever, it is the real world of human life, where no scientific method will currently work to more fully measure the human condition in all its complexity, simplicity, and OH GOD, overall insanity, with complex abstract language, and cultural byproducts mixed in.

It's a place for imaginative and creative minds to explore, AND PLAY, and a very difficult place for rigid minds to expand, I'm afraid when it comes to more fully understanding P, P and R, it seems.

Oops protons vs photons, I am blaming auto spelling and the fact that I am using a phone and not computer keyboard. Later on I will discuss Maxwell's equations with you.

nearly 4 months in, and i'm still rather sane...

Not in the strict sense of ownership; but the mods do tend to respect the wishes of OPs to lock 'their' threads when the topic has strayed too far or when individuals have hijacked the thread for their own purposes.That suits me just fine.

However, I'll wait a few more days and see if things cool down a bit.

Please people, let's return to the topic of the thread, otherwise this thread will be locked indeed.

That's great, and hopefully, from my sentence above, as my language can get a 'little' convoluted, you know that I do mean there are not any 'sane' problems at this time.

Funny that you can describe you extraordinarily convoluted and verbose diction in such a concise manner.

You will, no doubt, define the parameters as to what is acceptable.

If one may not effectively disagree with the OP then I think that such should be clearly stated.

Absolutely. Well OP thinks that this thread has strayed off the course....so it would be very much appreciated to be as pertinent as possible to the subject of the thread.