The Universe Could Have Formed Spontaneously From Nothing

Page 7 of 8 [ 124 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Sherlock03
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Oct 2012
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 594
Location: Virginia

16 Apr 2014, 1:32 pm

TallyMan wrote:

Sherlock03 wrote:

TallyMan wrote:

Sherlock03 wrote:

TallyMan wrote:

Sherlock03 wrote:

Strange to think we could invest so much time and money on theories when fellow humans die of starvation and disease every day.

Without study of pure science there would be no modern medicines, antibiotics, vaccinations, medical equipment or hospitals. Agriculture would also be harvesting much less of low yielding crops while pests ate the majority. So without investment of time in science there would be more people dying of starvation and disease every day.

This has little to do with the study in question. It is hard to justify a study when the end result is nothing.

With pure science the goal is knowledge. It is with this knowledge that technological and other advances are made. There is usually no advance idea of what technical benefits will result from any given scientific study. Without study of quantum physics for example modern day microprocessors wouldn't exist. Without study of atoms and nuclear physics there would be no nuclear power and no radiotherapy. Knowledge of evolution has led to effective medicines for combating various pathogens. Who would expect to get benefits from such arcane science? Pure science comes first, applications come later.

It is clear that you are passionate, yet all these things have a practical application. perhaps you can explain how mathematician nothing at the beginning of the universe can have a practical application.

Perhaps you can explain why understanding quantum theory could have any practical applications? After all it is "just" mathematics; and very obscure mathematics at that. The bottom line is that if physicists / mathematicians figure out the basis of our universe, the physics following on from that could open up countless new technologies and possibilities that were previously undreamed of. I have no idea what they may be; just as previous obscure physics discoveries have opened up new possibilities. As I keep repeating - pure science comes first, and from that knowledge applications and technologies are invented. Without this inquiring spirit we'd still all be living in caves and hunting mammoths with spears.

I do understand where you are coming from but you must agree that there are better things we can put our minds to rather than a theoretical theory that currently has no practical application.

_________________
"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." - Marcus Aurelius

TallyMan
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Mar 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,061

16 Apr 2014, 1:33 pm

Sherlock03 wrote:

Since scientists, etc are the ones who are most likely to find cures and solutions to practical problems wouldn't it be better if they focused on more pressing issues instead?

Some scientists ARE. Science works on many frontiers, some seeking practical solutions for today's problems and other scientists unravelling the workings of every aspect of the universe... which yields practical solutions for the future. Are you trying to suggest that ALL scientists should become short-sighted in their research and focus only on practical solutions for today?

_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.

TallyMan
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Mar 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,061

16 Apr 2014, 1:38 pm

Sherlock03 wrote:

... you must agree that there are better things we can put our minds to rather than a theoretical theory that currently has no practical application.

Why shouldn't scientists work at every frontier of knowledge? If everyone worked only on the problems of today, scientific and technological progress would stagnate. Pure science research is the greatest driver of new technology and new solutions to problems.

_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.

Sherlock03
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Oct 2012
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 594
Location: Virginia

16 Apr 2014, 1:47 pm

GGPViper wrote:

Quote:

I don't see why you are irritated at me for voicing what is clearly your own opinion. It is an interesting study with no current practical application. Whats wrong with suggesting that we focus on more pressing immediate concerns instead of theoretical disparity?

Because if people had heeded such advice in history, this is what the world would look like today:

You can't be seriously be making the assertion that cavemen only advanced by ruminating on theoretical concepts. :lol:

Why is everyone being so touchy about this? I feel like I have incurred the wrath of religious fanaticism by simply suggesting that scientist could serve a better purpose by helping the sick and solving pressing practical problems.

_________________
"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." - Marcus Aurelius

TallyMan
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Mar 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,061

16 Apr 2014, 1:49 pm

Sherlock03 wrote:

Maybe because you are implying that the only science worth doing is trying to solve today's needs. Are you suggesting that ALL scientists should be so narrowly focussed?

_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.

Sherlock03
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Oct 2012
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 594
Location: Virginia

16 Apr 2014, 1:49 pm

TallyMan wrote:

Sherlock03 wrote:

Since scientists, etc are the ones who are most likely to find cures and solutions to practical problems wouldn't it be better if they focused on more pressing issues instead?

I wouldn't call helping the dying short sighted.

_________________
"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." - Marcus Aurelius

TallyMan
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Mar 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,061

16 Apr 2014, 1:51 pm

Sherlock03 wrote:

TallyMan wrote:

Sherlock03 wrote:

Since scientists, etc are the ones who are most likely to find cures and solutions to practical problems wouldn't it be better if they focused on more pressing issues instead?

I wouldn't call helping the dying short sighted.

You still don't seem to grasp the fundamental issue that without pure research our "helping the dying" would still revolve around sprinkling magic herbs on them and chanting incantations to the gods.

_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.

Sherlock03
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Oct 2012
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 594
Location: Virginia

16 Apr 2014, 1:53 pm

TallyMan wrote:

Sherlock03 wrote:

Maybe because you are implying that the only science worth doing is trying to solve today's needs. Are you suggesting that ALL scientists should be so narrowly focussed?

The more scientist working on the problem the faster there will be a break through. I wouldn't say they should devote all resources to a single problem but it seems logical that the more important issues should receive the majority of the attention.

_________________
"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." - Marcus Aurelius

Sherlock03
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Oct 2012
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 594
Location: Virginia

16 Apr 2014, 2:00 pm

TallyMan wrote:

Sherlock03 wrote:

TallyMan wrote:

Sherlock03 wrote:

Since scientists, etc are the ones who are most likely to find cures and solutions to practical problems wouldn't it be better if they focused on more pressing issues instead?

I wouldn't call helping the dying short sighted.

You still don't seem to grasp the fundamental issue that without pure research our "helping the dying" would still revolve around sprinkling magic herbs on them and chanting incantations to the gods.

Oh come sir, you are comparing a purely theoretical mathematical idea about the origins of the universe to advances in medicine.

_________________
"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." - Marcus Aurelius

GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

16 Apr 2014, 2:01 pm

Sherlock03 wrote:

Because we - unlike you - know how infinitely valuable basic science (which has no immediate practical application) is to scientific progress. It is extremely arrogant to assume that one can single out specific recent scientific results and pass judgement on their usefulness.

Illustration: Louis Pasteur revolutionized medicine and food production by looking at something as trivial as spoiled milk...

trollcatman
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Dec 2012
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,919

16 Apr 2014, 2:07 pm

Also, the reason that people lack food or live in poverty is because the countries they live in are badly run. The technological possibility of feeding everyone is already here, we don't need more scientists for that. The global food production is already sufficient. It's just that some people eat a lot and other people have too little food.

Sherlock03
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Oct 2012
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 594
Location: Virginia

16 Apr 2014, 2:13 pm

GGPViper wrote:

Sherlock03 wrote:

Better be careful or the moderators will have your a**. Interesting that you seem so certain that a mathematical theory will have more use than devoting more time and money to finding cures for illnesses.Why do you want to push so hard on a theory that may never produce more than it consumes when there are countless advances to be be achieved through helping the sick?

_________________
"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." - Marcus Aurelius

TallyMan
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Mar 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,061

16 Apr 2014, 2:25 pm

Sherlock03 wrote:

GGPViper wrote:

Sherlock03 wrote:

What do you think led to the invention of the MRI medical scanner? Without pure science research (totally unrelated to medicine or other practical benefit) this invention would simply not have been a possibility. Despite your continued denial of the fact; pure science research leads to applications and technology. I'm done repeating this; you don't seem to understand science or how it works.

_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.

Sherlock03
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Oct 2012
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 594
Location: Virginia

16 Apr 2014, 2:27 pm

Well, the conversation seems to have died. I was just giving my opinion on how I believe science could be more completely used to help the world as did both of you. I respect your opinions and hope that you have respected mine. No hard feelings. Mazal tov!

_________________
"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." - Marcus Aurelius

GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

16 Apr 2014, 2:28 pm

Sherlock03 wrote:

GGPViper wrote:

Sherlock03 wrote:

I can do this all year....

In 1944, A mathematician and an economist came together to create a mathematical theory on how economic actors would act in situations where their utility would depend on the actions of other individuals. They invented the mathematical discipline of game theory. It had no practical implications at all at the time.

Yet, their work revolutionized the entire field of biology, and we wouldn't be able to explain the concept of natural selection, nor the existence - and treatment - of heritable diseases, without their work.

No one at the time had any knowledge about the significance of their work in 1944, because no-one could comprehend the long-term impact of their findings. It took decades of extremely brilliant minds like John Nash, John Maynard Smith, George Price, William Hamilton and Robert Trivers to truly demonstrate the magnitude of this work.

naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,137
Location: temperate zone

16 Apr 2014, 2:28 pm

Sherlock03 wrote:

naturalplastic wrote:

Sherlock03 wrote:

Strange to think we could invest so much time and money on theories when fellow humans die of starvation and disease every day.

Not sure what your point is.

The world spends more on the military than it does on 'theories'.

For that matter-the world spends more money on lipstick, beer, and on hyping the Superbowl, than it does on 'theories'. So why single out "theories" ?

But more to the point: knowledge is indivisible.

What could be more practical than seeking wealth (for yourself and others)?

And what quicker way to make the world wealthy could there be than to find a way to make base metals (like lead) into gold?

And thats exactly the quest that the alchemists of old devoted their lives to for 2000 years. The result of the 2000 year quest? NOTHING!

In contrast-what could be more IMpractical than wondering what air is?

The ancients assumed that air was an element- one thing.

Finnally a number of basement do-it-yourself scientists in the 1700's actually did experiments to figure out what air is.

They found that air was a blend of gases -one of which was nitrogen.

Then a centurey later one guy figured out how to turn nitrogen into dynamite, and another guy figured out how to turn nitrogen into fertilzer.

The first discovery lead to all the ordinance of modern warfare, and the deaths of millions. The later made modern agriculture possible-which made feeding you and I possible. So the deaths of millions, and the feeding and clothing of BILLIONS were both made possible because someone wondered what the heck air is. So you cant predict what will result from curiosity no matter how 'impractical' the curiosity may seem.

Well, I believe you answered it yourself. Since scientists, etc are the ones who are most likely to find cures and solutions to practical problems wouldn't it be better if they focused on more pressing issues instead?

Exactly. Scientist should only address pressing issues (like try to run base metal into gold) and spend the next 2000 years accomplishing nothing.

Page 7 of 8 [ 124 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Jump to:

The Universe Could Have Formed Spontaneously From Nothing Post Reply New Topic

The Universe Could Have Formed Spontaneously From Nothing