Let's not talk about the Big Bang

[mikkel_the_dane]

No, it really doesn't. There are international standards and agreed definitions at work in these sort of areas. If there weren't international cooperation would not be possible.

Yes, for that which natural science can do.
But for the rest, Science has limits: A few things that science does not do - Understanding Science the other forms of science are different.

Your trick is that subjectively you only accept the objective as science, but you don't notice that you subjectively only accept the objective.

 

[ratiocinator]

Yes, for that which natural science can do.

Yes for whether science deals with 'Truth', which was the question at hand which has nothing to do with your favourite link.

Your trick is that subjectively you only accept the objective as science, but you don't notice that you subjectively only accept the objective.

Word salad. Yum.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Yes for whether science deals with 'Truth', which was the question at hand which has nothing to do with your favourite link.


Word salad. Yum.

Well, here is the game.
There is a physical universe, therefore we ought to...
The first is hard science. The second is not.

Now you felt the need as need to defend hard science, but that felt need is not hard science. And the bold is not hard science.
So the moment you leave hard science, it shows. It too does so for me. We just do differently.

 

[Zwing]

…we are both subjective.

Without doubt!

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Without doubt!

Here is a lot of books reduced down to one cultural practice.
The universe is a combination of 2 forms of objective, the social, the individually human and the fight of how all that adds up with the idea of objective rational evidence. Tip for the bold, it doesn't. It is an idea just like God.

 

[ratiocinator]

Well, here is the game.
There is a physical universe, therefore we ought to...

No. There is a physical universe, therefore you can accept it and study it with the tools that have been developed and been shown to work, and/or play silly games like yours.

 

[Zwing]

…the fight of how all that adds up with the idea of objective rational evidence. Tip for the bold, it doesn't. It is an idea just like God.

Hmmmm… Food for thought, and just in time for breakfast.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

No. There is a physical universe, therefore you can accept it and study it with the tools that have been developed and been shown to work, and/or play silly games like yours.

The silly games are in the physical universe as parts of the physical universe. Now if you with evidence can show that what I do is not a part of the physical universe I will listen. But as long as you can't do that, this thread is a part of the physical universe.

 

[ratiocinator]

The silly games are in the physical universe as parts of the physical universe.

And...?

Now if you with evidence can show that what I do is not a part of the physical universe I will listen. But as long as you can't do that, this thread is a part of the physical universe.

Nobody ever said it wasn't.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

And...?


Nobody ever said it wasn't.

Good, so that something is nonsense to you is physical and that it makes sense to me is physical. That is the end of the physical as the game you play. You are looking at the limit of hard science.

 

[ratiocinator]

Good, so that something is nonsense to you is physical and that it makes sense to me is physical. That is the end of the physical as the game you play. You are looking at the limit of hard science.

Not at all - the limit of current science, perhaps. What I'm looking at is a complex brain that appears obsessed with the irrelevant and bizarre. The evidence to date suggests that if we could fully analyse human brains, we could explain why, in terms of hard science.

 

[RestlessSoul]

No. There is a physical universe, therefore you can accept it and study it with the tools that have been developed and been shown to work, and/or play silly games like yours.

Be that as it may, there is no meaningful way to separate a system being observed, from the observer, nor the observer from the act of observation. This phenomena becomes acute at the quantum level. Hence "due to non-local features of quantum theory, a consistent description of any system must finally include the whole universe" (- George Kristof Joos). Included in the account of the whole universe, must necessarily be an account of the consciousness of the observer.

Simply put, science is a method of observing and understanding the natural world. If you can find a means of observation and understanding which eliminates the human perspective, you may have achieved true objectivity; but the outcomes of that will necessarily be beyond human observation or understanding.

 

[shunyadragon]

The knowledge you talk about is basically conjecture regarding what happened at the beginning. Yet you think there was always something. Anyway, hope things go well for you.

The above does not reflect the contemporary science. It is only a brief statement of no meaning. The problem remains that you have a religious agenda based on ancient tribal scripture and reject science on many issues.

 

[shunyadragon]

So you say. Now show evidence for that.

No response. It is simply a fact that ALL the major journals of the major universities of the world are translated and distributed around the world, actually via the internet today. For example:

Scientific, Technical and Medical Translation Services - Language Scientific

Language Scientific provides technical, medical and scientific translation services. We are a US-based translation and localization company serving over 1,500 global corporations in over 215 languages. Our Specialization Language Scientific specializes in translation of technical, medical and...

www.languagescientific.com

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

No response. It is simply a fact that ALL the major journals of the major universities of the world are translated and distributed around the world, actually via the internet today. For example:

Scientific, Technical and Medical Translation Services - Language Scientific

Language Scientific provides technical, medical and scientific translation services. We are a US-based translation and localization company serving over 1,500 global corporations in over 215 languages. Our Specialization Language Scientific specializes in translation of technical, medical and...

www.languagescientific.com

Yeah and it is fact that I have several books on about different approaches to what science is.

 

[shunyadragon]

Where?


Evasion. You have posted nothing that supports your claims about space and time not being continuous at the "quantum scale" as current science.

Evasion in the extreme. You should no better. See post #3341

 

[shunyadragon]

Yeah and it is fact that I have several books on about different approaches to what science is.

So what?!?!?! No reference provided on your part. You asked for a specific reference, and I provided it and you failed to respond. Another reference here: Translation — Science Journal Editors (SJE)

 

[shunyadragon]

That the universe works the way it does, independently of the observer and the way she chooses to observe it, is far from being the consensus in theoretical physics (arguably the most quantifiable and therefore objectively precise of the hard sciences).

“You may be inclined to believe that when you observe something in the world, you are passively looking at it just the way it would have been were you not there. But quantum contextuality rules this out. There is no way to define a reality that is independent of the way we choose to look at it.”
- Chris Ferrie

Evasion par excellence. This only states the obvious that there are many unanswered in science. No meaning beyond the obvious. Please respond to post #3341.

 

[shunyadragon]

The more I think about things like something coming from nothing and "evolution" on other planets, the more it becomes bordering on the insane. And awful. But you have a good night.

Your view of science goes far beyond the insane including self imposed ignorance of science. Since you have posted here you have never posted anything concerning science ti support your assertions. You simply back up with the assertion ''The Bible says so .'

By the way science does not propose any sort of Creation from .absolute nothing.'

 

[ratiocinator]

Evasion in the extreme.

Yes, please stop.

You should no better. See post #3341

I did, see #3,362