Wholly inaccurate. What you are describing is a theory of Quantum spacetime or quantized spacetime which we dont' have yet. We don't have any well-formulated theory of such an entity (there are several ongoing and mutually exclusive attempts to formulate one) and absolutely no observational...
I'm reminded for some reasons of pots and kettles and the color black.
Speaking of outrageous statements, the above certainly qualifies. Firstly, we can't "objectively observe" or "observe" in any other way any physical state, property, process, etc., as being "continuous", whether classical or...
1) Every deterministic system is a special case of a stochastic or random system. One can, for example, treat ODEs and PDEs in the larger framework of stochastic differential equations, as the reduction to what we might call deterministic systems from statistical or probabilistic ones is one way...
Now that I have responded to the "causal closure" issue in brief above, I can dedicate a post to this matter.
I’ll start with the highlights of the summary of the cliff’s notes version of the answer I was writing before I realized it was already several pages and I hadn’t even reached in the of...
I'm generally very sympathetic to philosophers of physics (and philosophy more generally) compared to the disdain many physicists too often display here. But even I have to admit that when it comes to statements about causal closure even eminent philosophers such as Mario Bunge err tragically in...
This is completely false. First, iterated systems that are "chaotic" are irrelevant here as they can only ever be course grained models with an underlying dynamics requiring continuity if they are to model physical phenomena; you're conflating a class of "chaotic" phenomena modeled using...
It isn't. At all.
It isn't. Classical laws can yield approximately correct predictions, but as the there are no classical systems dice aren't classical and neither is anything else.
I’ve never really understood this emphasis on quantum randomness vs. classical determinism as it is supposed to...
This is patently and absurdly false. Firstly, it should be obvious that for Newton and for physicists after Newton, both time and space were "inherent" to the universe (things are rather more subtle, but as this remains the case after Einstein we can gloss over that for now), and it was and...
The problem is that you do not know enough to understand what the world-renowned physicists/cosmologists are saying (or are quoted as saying). This isn’t your fault. You simply lack both the knowledge and the experience to see “behind” (as it were) the use of certain words like “predict” to...
They are my colleagues, as this is my living (physics, mostly quantum foundations but also statistics of complex systems and statistical physics, data analysis in HEP, etc.). I am not, however, a cosmological. Luckily, however, cosmologists don't try to hide well-known facts. They disagree...
And what do you imagine inflationary theory "predicts"? What is its "empirical" foundation? It "predicts" nothing in the manner that one typically would understand this term outside of certain areas within physics, because the models are constructed based upon known physics and observations and...
Not actually true at all, really. Of course, there are many cosmologists and others who use the term "predict" to include e.g., "would require" (in the say that string theories "predict" supersymmetry because string theories require SUSY at a foundational level), or "in retrospect" (the way that...
I suppose there is a certain sense in which this is true, at least concerning The Scientific Method presented in e.g., science education classes and textbooks (up to and including college), popular science books, popular science magazines and online equivalents, etc. As we don’t actually use The...
Probably the only paper Einstein wrote that was peer-reviewed was rejected (apparently somewhat to Einstein's benefit, not so much because the paper contained errors--as Einstein elsewhere published errors he later publicly retracted with admirable humility far too infrequently seen among...
Yes, and behavioral studies, genomics (and omics and bioinformatics methods), whole swathes of big data analyses on vast bioinformation databases, etc. Of course, most of these are more problematic and only indirectly measure variations within and among the populations of interest.
But the...
Ok, I’ll simplify. Finding that people born male can have brains that “look” female or vice versa challenges the very idea that brains can “look” either male or female at all.
Now, I’ll attempt to explain, in greater depth but hopefully still simply, why this is so.
You wrote that...
Think about this claim for a minute. To even get off of the ground, it would have to be the case that previous research had shown what it means for a brain to “look like” the brain of a particular sex. That is, if it is the case that research shows “transgender people (to reference the title)...
This is ridiculous. Even the study doesn't hide the fact that is hasn't been a century since the worst eugenics-based horror of the 20th century (and arguably one of the appalling atrocities in human history) occured; namely, the holocaust. And it was the NAZI atrocities that caused what had...
It doesn't, and cannot say that (not correctly, anyway). Pretending for the moment that the garbage statistical methods used were actually robust, appropriate, and altogether decent and the sampling likewise unproblematic, the analyses rests on the use of statistical significance using p values...