RELIGOUS SCIENTISM - "WHERE IS THE MATH"?

[TagliatelliMonster]

"Neglectable", eh?

Everything in reality affects everything else in reality on a real time basis and you want to neglect what we know about the processes by which they interact! You also want to neglect chaos and every experiment you deem insignificant" or even "irrelevant". There are no insignificant or irrelevant experiments because all math and all experiment apply to all things on a real time basis as well.

In your zeal to reduce reality to a few simple theories you have also reduced an understanding of the big picture to disjointed pixels and scanned lines.

Owkay.
Meanwhile Newtonian physics is still perfectly applicable to situations where relativistic effects are neglectable.

For example in a GPS system using various satellites orbiting the earth at high speeds, relativistic effects are not neglectable. So you can't make a working GPS system with Newtonian physics.

I once had a TV where the picture went out and all that was left was two horizontal lines in the center. Oddly enough if you looked just below these lines and flicked your eyes upward at the proper speed you could catch a glimpse of the picture! I found that a piece of glass held between the lines and my eye when flapped like a bird's wing would produce a tolerable viewing experience.

With radio you didn't need to see the picture at all. But with TV you can't follow the plot without seeing the picture.

Cool story bro

 

[Audie]

I prefer this conclusion before your next one.

That's another thing not to mimic-

Choosing conclusions because you like them.

There's an integrity issue in that which it might
behoove you to investigate, as you seem unaware of it.if

 

[Native]

The key word in that link is *nearly*. Circular orbits do not exist in nature.

Well, if you hold onto "nearly", you have to explain the overall scales and causes of orbital degrees of elliptical motions.

 

[Nakosis]

I know all too well how the present Thunderbolts society can result in all kinds of "cranky comments" from fellow debaters who have not analysed and considered the embedded shortcomings in their own conventional cosmology.

Abstract
Third episode in the Misconception series on the EU Model - with an emphasis on how science is practiced, interpreted, publicized, and absorbed by society.

Math isn't science, and science isn't math. For example, planetary orbits were believed to be perfectly circular. When proven false, a mathematical workaround was devised - epicycles. Although mathematically elegant, the epicyclic model failed to reflect reality both on the Solar System and Galactic scales.

Mathematics can describe nature with precision - it's known as the language of the universe - although how it's interpreted can be subjective and even lost in translation.

Building science on math is putting the cart before the horse - like running an enterprise with only accountants under a delusional business model.

Author and independent researcher David Drew analyzes in this video the role of mathematics in cosmology and in the scientific method.

Other Links in this series:
May 11, 2024 Misconception #1: Where's the Problem? | Thunderbolts
• Misconception #1: Where's the Problem...
June 21, 2024 Misconception #2: Where's the Science? | Thunderbolt
• Misconception #2: Where's the Science...
--------------
Thoughts and comments anyone?

That's like saying science is not English and English is not science.

Math is just a language.

 

[Native]

The key word in that link is *nearly*. Circular orbits do not exist in nature.

Well, if you hold onto "nearly", you have to explain the overall scales and causes of orbital degrees of elliptical motions.

 

[Native]

That's another thing not to mimic-

Choosing conclusions because you like them.

Apparently you cannot hold onto your initial conclusion of not following me

 

[Native]

Owkay.
Meanwhile Newtonian physics is still perfectly applicable to situations where relativistic effects are neglectable.

Making a cosmology on neglectable exceptions gets you very fast nowhere.

 

[cladking]

Owkay.
Meanwhile Newtonian physics is still perfectly applicable to situations where relativistic effects are neglectable.

I never said it isn't.

I said everything would be utterly different if only newtonian physics determined reality. If it suddenly changed now everything would be completely different very soon.

I said reality is highly complex and implied that even if we knew all the laws that governed it then every one of these laws would still apply.

You want to believe you see the big picture so you just deem most experiment, most knowledge, and most processes/ forces to be neglectable.

Cool story bro

Yeah, it is.

Stupid stuff like this happens to me all the time because I do lots of stupid stuff. In this case I had opened up a brand new TV so it would be easier to access when it broke later and because it got a little too hot when in use so I wanted to add some vents. After a few months the case shifted relative the circuit board in a move and broke off a corner of the circuit board. It would have been difficult to fix because several connections were severed and in those days I was not as good at soldering.

I wanted to film it through the flapping glass but the movie camera I had was insufficient to the task.

I discovered it while sitting there listening to something or other and during an ad noticed I knew the phone number before it was said. I soon realized that moving my eyes up between the two lines provided a brief image.

 

[Audie]

That's like saying science is not English and English is not science.

Math is just a language.

This sure has been the thread for nonsense

 

[Native]

Stupid stuff like this happens to me all the time because I do lots of stupid stuff.

At least it can be very entertaining Especially for ones surroundings

 

[cladking]

At least it can be very entertaining Especially for ones surroundings

I think of life as nothing but an ongoing experiment, series of experiments, and new experiments as I think of them or they present themselves. Things around me seem to be in a state of chaos to the untrained eye but I'm watching everything and can lay my hands on anything given sufficient time.

Instead of ongoing observation as all other nonhuman life does, I do experiment.

From the new TV set I broke I learned to try to limit the number of spare parts I get from things I fix. Spare parts are only a good thing if they turn out to have really been "spare".

 

[Native]

Things around me seem to be in a state of chaos to the untrained eye but I'm watching everything and can lay my hands on anything given sufficient time.

I know the feeling - and the skills to dig into and handling things.

 

[Pogo]

Models brakes down when factual physical observations proves both the models and its connected math wrong. And both is the case in for instants with "black holes".

Besides: Contradicted models doesn´t prevent cosmological scientists to hold onto the connected failed math.

Math is a formal logic structure agreed to by its practicioners, when a model fails, it is not the math that is at fault rather the hypothesis logic that went into the model. As to black holes and singularities they are just the limitations of the math being used to describe them. 0 divided by 0 is undefined, it is not wrong but just that if the mathematic equations in the model get to that state, we say "we don't know" and don't go making up something with no basis just so we have an answer. Sometimes the answer is a new mathematical logic such as was invented/discovered by Newton and Leibniz or the concept of imaginary numbers that has allowed understanding of whole new areas of our existence.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Making a cosmology on neglectable exceptions gets you very fast nowhere.

Hey, it gets your rocket off of the earth and into orbit.

Rocket trajectories are calculated with Newtonian mechanics because GR is much harder to work with while the margins of error on this scale, at those speeds and masses, from relativistic effects are so small that they make no difference.

There is no issue at all with using newtonian physics in such circumstance.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I never said it isn't.

I said everything would be utterly different if only newtonian physics determined reality. If it suddenly changed now everything would be completely different very soon.

Ok. Not sure what your point is, but okay.
Yes, if things were different then things would be different.

I said reality is highly complex and implied that even if we knew all the laws that governed it then every one of these laws would still apply.
You want to believe you see the big picture so you just deem most experiment, most knowledge, and most processes/ forces to be neglectable.

I have no idea what you are on about.

Yeah, it is.

Stupid stuff like this happens to me all the time because I do lots of stupid stuff. In this case I had opened up a brand new TV so it would be easier to access when it broke later and because it got a little too hot when in use so I wanted to add some vents. After a few months the case shifted relative the circuit board in a move and broke off a corner of the circuit board. It would have been difficult to fix because several connections were severed and in those days I was not as good at soldering.

I wanted to film it through the flapping glass but the movie camera I had was insufficient to the task.

I discovered it while sitting there listening to something or other and during an ad noticed I knew the phone number before it was said. I soon realized that moving my eyes up between the two lines provided a brief image.

So do you want a medal for this or...?

 

[Native]

Hey, it gets your rocket off of the earth and into orbit.

Rocket trajectories are calculated with Newtonian mechanics because GR is much harder to work with while the margins of error on this scale, at those speeds and masses, from relativistic effects are so small that they make no difference.

There is no issue at all with using newtonian physics in such circumstance.

There is STILL the issue of working with a dynamic force which no one can explain. Especially as the force in question does not comply on galactic scales regarding celestial motions.

Holding on to the terrestrial gravitational approach hinders astrophysicists and cosmologists to recognize the natural ideas of cosmos and the universe at large.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

There is STILL the issue of working with a dynamic force which no one can explain. Especially as the force in question does not comply on galactic scales regarding celestial motions.

Holding on to the terrestrial gravitational approach hinders astrophysicists and cosmologists to recognize the natural ideas of cosmos and the universe at large.

Good thing all those experts have random lay-people like you, correcting them on a religious forum in some corner of the internet!

 

[Native]

Math is a formal logic structure agreed to by its practicioners, when a model fails, it is not the math that is at fault rather the hypothesis logic that went into the model.

In my analytic perspective, both the model and its math fails simultaneously.

". . . it is not wrong but just that if the mathematic equations in the model get to that state, we say "we don't know" and don't go making up something with no basis just so we have an answer . . ."

If so, both the make up ideas of "black holes", "dark matter", and "dark energy" shouldn't have been launched and repeated as if they are the facts.

When seriously contradicted, and in the "we don´t know"-situations, its the very foundation of assumed and included - or excluded - laws which should be reconsidered and eventually discarded.

 

[Native]

Good thing all those experts have random lay-people like you, correcting them on a religious forum in some corner of the internet!

You´re welcome

BTW: You should consider if you are here in this corner of the internet for the same reason: To be corrected by not indoctrinated debaters.

 

[Audie]

Good thing all those experts have random lay-people like you, correcting them on a religious forum in some corner of the internet!

There's probably at least a platoon of randos
on this forum who know more than any scientist on earth.