ex-President Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
No it's not about the concept of "theory", i am saying that if ou didn't conduct the experiment yourself, any finding by others require you to have trust in other people, or in the process (not in the scientifical process, in the peer review process, the publication process and so on).
If you didn't personally measure the blood of subjects in a medical test, why do you blindly believe the people who claim the measures are x y z? why is it different from believing a shaman who tells you he literal
Because the other people can demonstrate using methods I find logical and persuasive how they arrived at their findings, and I have little reason to think that they have any motivation to deceive me. Also, the a priori probability that the measures are x, y and z are not zero. The a priori probability that the shaman talks with god are zero or very close to it. The more fanciful the claim, the stronger the evidence that is required to support it.
Holy derail up in here
So what's the latest on that Mickey Mouse finding, that something needed to be observed, otherwise it wouldn't happen?
The blindness is found where sight is needed, the demented slaughterhouse of a world out there
Not in a laboratory
I think that the discovery that subatomic particles are 1) both particle and waves 2) stochastic in their essense (they aren't THERE, they are in a cloud around a point , their location is a probability distribution, not a place) was very spiritual.
The problem with all these interpretations, particularly of quantum mechanics, is that it is an attempt at exposition of complicated equations to lay people. The equations *are* the theory, interpretations and analogies are imperfect explanations of it a form more accessible to ordinary humans. The problem is that people will invariably think that these analogies are the nuts and bolts of the theory, which they are not. The phrase "shut up and calculate" encompasses this idea.
Finding spirituality in particle-wave duality is a bit like finding it in transcendental numbers - both are things that sound like they hint at something that they don't.
Credit to Howard Beale lol
Well, if there's anybody out there that can look around this demented slaughterhouse of a world we live in and tell me that man is a noble creature, believe me: ...
The problem with all these interpretations, particularly of quantum mechanics, is that it is an attempt at exposition of complicated equations to lay people. The equations *are* the theory, interpretations and analogies are imperfect explanations of it a form more accessible to ordinary humans. The problem is that people will invariably think that the analogies are the nuts and bolts of the theory, which they are not. The phrase "shut up and calculate" encompasses this idea.
Finding spirituality
They can't distill it, eh? Language isn't up to the task
By natural man. Gotta define the terms that aren't understood by anyone but physicists anyway.
Ah yes, the good ole "god of the gaps". Why god, why not...
Religion is already pretty much a synonym for "things science hasn't explained, or it has explained but I don't understand" for most people who subscribe to it.
I'm not saying it was aliens, but
Surprised constable Spew of the derail police hasn't shown up on scene yet. Response times have really gone downhill since sergeant Bowser retired.
Trump Media & Technology Group
Atomized, tho lol
It's all good. I understand there's a lot in the Bible that seems weird or contradictory. It's a mystery to Billy Graham, Karl and Doyle Hargreaves in sling blade.
But there's also profound stuff in the text. Inconceivable stuff
There’s profound stuff in the Koran, Iliad and Bhagavad Gita also. The conclusion most people draw is humans are capable of writing down profound ideas. If you want to claim the Bible is special, go ahead.
there is "excessive" in the definition
/excessive belief in the power of scientific knowledge and techniques./
Way to quote it out of context.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictiona...
1: methods and attitudes typical of or attributed to the natural scientist
2: an exaggerated trust in the efficacy of the methods of natural science applied to all areas of investigation (as in philosophy, the social sciences, and the humanities)
The "exaggerated" qualifier applies to soft sciences only.
There’s profound stuff in the Koran, Iliad and Bhagavad Gita also. The conclusion most people draw is humans are capable of writing down profound ideas. If you want to claim the Bible is special, go ahead.
I don't see what's particularly special about any of these books, much less "profound". Then again, despite rave reviews, I haven't read them, so maybe I'm missing a trick there.
