When your ideas fall in here ,be of great courage!

[walkntune]

Just wanted to encourage those whose ideas fall into this forum!

Most of Einsteins work would have fallen in here first before he worked out the math 10 or so years later! The same with Newton and all great scientist who start out with intuitive thinking and imagination first!The intuitive mind always has to take the scrutiny of the logical mind but its the intuitive mind that always leads the way! I will leave you with some quotes from Einstein!

 

"Imagination is more important than knowledge."

"The only real valuable thing is intuition."

"A person starts to live when he can live outside himself."

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."

"Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new."

"Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds."

"The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education."

"Education is what remains after one has forgotten everything he learned in school."

"The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing."

"No, this trick won't work...How on earth are you ever going to explain in terms of chemistry and physics so important a biological phenomenon as first love?"

[Klaynos]

Most of Einsteins work would have fallen in here first before he worked out the math 10 or so years later! The same with Newton

 

Want to cite some sources on that one?

[Sisyphus]

Einstein understood current theories of physics.

[walkntune]

What, do you want proof of the quotes from Einstein?(is this what you want a resource for) Those quotes are an example of his thinking!You want proof of the work taking years to work out the math? I will see what I can find! I don't necessarily need Newton, Einstein set a great example alone!

 

Meanwhile Einstein Quoted

"The only real valuable thing is intuition."

 

Is there a logical explanation on this idea?

[Klaynos]

What, do you want proof of the quotes from Einstein?(is this what you want a resource for) Those quotes are an example of his thinking!You want proof of the work taking years to work out the math? I will see what I can find! I don't necessarily need Newton, Einstein set a great example alone!

 

I want to see the proof that he tried to get anyone to accept his ideas BEFORE he worked out the maths. Or that he felt the maths wasn't required, which is what you implied.

[walkntune]

Never implied the math was not necessary! Only implied he backed up his intuitive thinking later by using math!

[Klaynos]

Well before the maths, it was clearly just speculation and yep would have fallen in here.

 

We must of course remember in these discussions that as Sisyphus says Einstein understood the 'current' theories, and also that physics has moved a very long way over the last 100 years....

[Mr Skeptic]

Never implied the math was not necessary! Only implied he backed up his intuitive thinking later by using math!

 

I thought that he developed his General Theory of Relativity based on tensor math which he had learned. Its not very intuitive. He developed his quantized explanation for the photoelectric effect to get the numbers to add up, despite it going against all intuition and known science of the time.

[walkntune]

No he actually had thought experiments of riding on a light beam that started him on his journey on the theory of relativity! He was around 16 years old!Like I was saying, his intuitive thinking was leading his math!

Edited November 5, 2009 by walkntune

[Mr Skeptic]

Nope, he was making the mathematical predictions of Maxwell's equations (light travels at c) fit in with the Principle of Relativity (an ancient principle that said you can't tell how fast you're going without looking outside). To fit them together he had to make some extremely unintuitive mathematical predictions.

[walkntune]

Einstein leaned forward, "… it is not a religion that teaches that man is made in the image of God—that is anthropomorphic. Man has infinite dimensions and finds God in his conscience. This religion has no dogma other than teaching man that the universe is rational and that its highest destiny is to ponder it and co-create with its laws. There are only two limiting factors: first, that what seems impenetrable to us is as important as what is cut and dried; and: second that our faculties are dull and can only comprehend wisdom and

serene beauty in crude forms, but the heart of man through intuition leads

us to greater understanding of ourselves and the universe."

 

 

Although intuition is what allows us to move forward—is the most important part of thinking—it alone is not enough. Knowledge also has its place, but intuition is the gatekeeper at the most critical juncture. Even though the workings of intuition remain mysterious, it is a reality.

 

"Isn't truth inherent in man?" I interjected. "You once told me that progress is made only by intuition, and not by the accumulation of knowledge."

"It's not as simple as that," replied Einstein. "Knowledge is necessary, too. An intuitive child couldn't accomplish anything without some knowledge. There will come a point in everyone's life, however where only intuition can make the leap ahead, without ever knowing precisely how. One can never know why but one must accept intuition as a fact."

This post was for encouragement to those who rely on intuition for direction!

I posted it as I believe there is a science in using intuition!

To prove Einstein used intuition to propel his knowledge forward is to only be able to observe his actions and words as a witness for he is dead!

Did he propel science forward sure!

 

I hope all of those who come to obtain knowledge will use it for the welfare of all and not for self glorification and power!

[Phi for All]

Intuition and speculation will only get you as far as the first step of the scientific method. If you skip any of the steps in the process and rely on intuition alone to tell you you're right, then you aren't doing science.

[Sayonara]

What will help the people who find their posts ending up in this forum is showing them how to develop their ideas within a scientific framework, not sending them on a pointless ego trip.

 

Nice sentiment, poor execution.

[Mr Skeptic]

This post was for encouragement to those who rely on intuition for direction!

I posted it as I believe there is a science in using intuition!

 

And intuition is almost always the first step, the source for the proposed hypothesis. But tentative suggestions is all it can provide; and priceless as those may turn out to be, it matters not in the least if they cannot develop it. What use are a million suggestions which all make sense, if you can't tell which one is the right one?

 

And even so, there are so many who claim they have the greatest theory since sliced bread but in truth don't even have a hypothesis. This happens when their idea is so vague it says nothing (or everything), or when they are unable to articulate it clearly.

[walkntune]

Just a thought!

Suppose you have a piece of lint!

This piece of lint happens to fall on Mr. Einsteins shirt.

Suppose Mrs Einstein gets turned off by this piece of lint and so they never went out!

Because of this Albert was never born.

Endless possibilities!

Someone else maybe discovers relativity and atom bomb etc.

Maybe America looses war!

I could go on and on with possibilities that could have been started just from the action and reaction process caused from a piece of lint!

What is there 8 billion people in the world?

Everyone making decisions every day that could impact and change reality and the physical world as we know it!

I am grateful that for the most part people try to follow a morality that they sense through intuition in decisions because there are a lot of times when logic takes the easy path morality is on a harder one!

We may come to an understanding with logic how decisions have consequences but we will always be uncertain what the consequences are!

Because of this when science has come to know its last uncertainty it will be standing in the very face of the fact that it is uncertain and as Einstein said ,

There will come a point in everyone's life, however where only intuition can make the leap ahead, without ever knowing precisely how. One can never know why but one must accept intuition as a fact."

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Intuition and speculation will only get you as far as the first step of the scientific method. If you skip any of the steps in the process and rely on intuition alone to tell you you're right, then you aren't doing science.

You may be correct but I am showing just by the affects of an action and reaction process from a piece of lint how the whole world could have been changed therefore science may not actually come to the end of all means.

I actually think only intuitively(the reason for my thoughts) and come to many truths!I think science is a great tool especially for those who are logically minded but also believe there is a reason people need each other and intuition nor logic can't come to know the truth by itself!

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

What will help the people who find their posts ending up in this forum is showing them how to develop their ideas within a scientific framework, not sending them on a pointless ego trip.

To keep running with your imagination is never a pointless ego trip and logic without it is pointless!

 

"Where Logic will get you from A to B imagination will take you everywhere!"

another Einstein Quote

 

Sorry I use him so much but he was one of the greats who had both intuition and logic. Most people lean on one or the other more often so he had a great balance which made him a great scientist!

Edited November 6, 2009 by walkntune
Consecutive posts merged.

[ajb]

Einstein understood current theories of physics.

 

To me, this seems the most relevant statement to this thread.

 

 

Most things get placed here because they do not appear to build on known physics and usually stem from some misunderstanding.

 

I would encourage any speculative suggestions (remembering that to some extent all research is speculative) that are build on well established physics remain in the physics sections. For example discussions of the physics beyond the standard model and SUSY are the domain of physics, even without experimental verification.

 

I would also encourage "what if?" questions to remain in the physics section if the analysis is sensible. For example, what if the graviton is massive or what would happen if Planck's constant was much larger.

 

It is the methodology that places things in this section rather than the questions themselves.

[swansont]

I would also encourage "what if?" questions to remain in the physics section if the analysis is sensible. For example, what if the graviton is massive or what would happen if Planck's constant was much larger.

 

It is the methodology that places things in this section rather than the questions themselves.

 

I try and follow this for physics-related posts. Asking a question, even if it's "out there," will elicit physics responses and deserves to remain there. It's the poster who insists they have new physics, which contradicts the accepted physics, who will have their posts moved here.

 

Unfortunately, sometimes a thread gets dragged into the land speculation by responses rather than the original post, and it ends up being better to move the whole thread vs splitting it up.

[Sayonara]

To keep running with your imagination is never a pointless ego trip and logic without it is pointless!

OK, show me where "running with your imagination" and "develop your ideas within a scientific framework" become mutually exclusive.

[walkntune]

To me, this seems the most relevant statement to this thread.

 

 

Most things get placed here because they do not appear to build on known physics and usually stem from some misunderstanding.

 

I would encourage any speculative suggestions (remembering that to some extent all research is speculative) that are build on well established physics remain in the physics sections. For example discussions of the physics beyond the standard model and SUSY are the domain of physics, even without experimental verification.

 

I would also encourage "what if?" questions to remain in the physics section if the analysis is sensible. For example, what if the graviton is massive or what would happen if Planck's constant was much larger.

 

It is the methodology that places things in this section rather than the questions themselves.

 

And to all of those who are only logical I am sure!

 

The reason posts fall in pseudo and speculations is not even questioned.

I understand the science method is only based on what is logical and proved with math!

I am an intuitional thinker and all though have some common sense and logic, I rely on intuition to guide me to what is true for me and then I rationalize it with logic as supporting evidence.

Don't confuse intuitional thinkers with those who are led by emotions!

Now I have shown how a piece of lint can change the world with certain responses from human behavior. If science wants to do away with religion and belief systems it will have to be able to rationalize consequences of behavior with logic! Not just the way behavior has consequences but actually rationalize what consequences will be. Otherwise people will always have to step out into the unknown with faith and intuition or be controlled by their fear.

Logic gives us great understanding of the universe but only of that which is logical. Unfortunately the universe is not bound by logic as I have proven above with a piece of lint!

 

The very science i am trying to study is the difference between logic and intuition and observing the human behavior of both traits!

Its no coincidence that we have republicans and democrats, bloods and crypts,etc..!

I am very grateful to those who do study science and come to logical understanding for i believe it takes both to understand the truth!

 

But just wanted those to know whose posts fall in this category to not be dismayed, they are just on the opposite and equal side of the equation but

in a place where their ideas are criticized by the math only!

 

What will help the people who find their posts ending up in this forum is showing them how to develop their ideas within a scientific framework, not sending them on a pointless ego trip.

 

Nice sentiment, poor execution.

Not everyone who shares ideas, especially from an intuitional point of view are in it for the ego!

Only logic would tell someone to have a crab mentality and climb to the top no matter who you step on!

Intuition will usually follow a moral path on whats best for all mankind!

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

OK, show me where "running with your imagination" and "develop your ideas within a scientific framework" become mutually exclusive.

 

I think I have already with a piece of lint! Was kind of the point!!!!

Science cannot come to know the consequences of actions of behavior!

It can study behavior but never what consequences will be!

[ajb]

I try and follow this for physics-related posts.

 

Yes, sorry my post was not really a comment on the quality of your moderation. I just wanted to give some indication as to why I expect most posts end up here.

[CharonY]

Intuition without knowledge is just random guessing.

[swansont]

Yes, sorry my post was not really a comment on the quality of your moderation. I just wanted to give some indication as to why I expect most posts end up here.

 

I didn't take it to be. I was agreeing that your expectations were reasonable.

[Mr Skeptic]

I am an intuitional thinker and all though have some common sense and logic, I rely on intuition to guide me to what is true for me and then I rationalize it with logic as supporting evidence.

 

Then you will fail, as intuition will not always guide you to the truth. Logic should be used to verify, not to rationalize. And besides, logic also includes inductive logic which you should read up on. Intuition is a form of inductive logic, though with very unclear steps.

 

The problem with inductive logic is that it cannot make certain statements. Deductive logic, on the other hand, can make definite conclusions given that the premises are true.

 

Logic gives us great understanding of the universe but only of that which is logical. Unfortunately the universe is not bound by logic as I have proven above with a piece of lint!

 

However, the parts of the universe that are not logical (if any) cannot be studied at all, not just that they cannot be studied with logic. Think of it this way, what can you say about it that logic cannot?

 

Only logic would tell someone to have a crab mentality and climb to the top no matter who you step on!

 

Nope, that would be intuition and instinct. Logic would at least have you be careful not to step on the wrong person, and then only if your values don't include others' feelings.

[walkntune]

Then you will fail, as intuition will not always guide you to the truth. Logic should be used to verify, not to rationalize. And besides, logic also includes inductive logic which you should read up on. Intuition is a form of inductive logic, though with very unclear steps.

When I said rationalize as supporting evidence, this is verification!

 

However, the parts of the universe that are not logical (if any) cannot be studied at all, not just that they cannot be studied with logic. Think of it this way, what can you say about it that logic cannot?

What other method do we use to study outside of logic?

I can say the sky is beautiful!

Logic can't say that!

 

Nope, that would be intuition and instinct. Logic would at least have you be careful not to step on the wrong person, and then only if your values don't include others' feelings.

You are right with the instinct as I feel we carry certain instincts to be first and superior even from sperm racing to the egg!

But yet its also logical to put yourself first if you are trying to make it to the top!

Your values I think will fall under intuition!

Like the sky being blue!

[Mr Skeptic]

When I said rationalize as supporting evidence, this is verification!

 

My apologies. When people say "rationalize" they usually mean that someone made a conclusion and then tried their best to convince themselves or others that the conclusion is a logical one, basically making excuses for it, rather than as you used it. Indeed, the foundation of science is as you said, to think up of a hypothesis (usually via intuition) and then formally show that it can be deduced via logic.

 

Usually the logic in question is inductive logic, and so they can only give an estimate of the probability of it being true to a certain accuracy under a certain range of circumstances.

 

What other method do we use to study outside of logic?

I can say the sky is beautiful!

Logic can't say that!

 

So are you saying that it is impossible to make a computer program that can determine that something is beautiful? I would disagree. (a computer program is based on logic).

 

Just to give an example, there is a logical explanation for why some faces appear more beautiful than others: for example, beautiful faces correlate with intelligence

The famous waist-to-hip ratio correlates well with fertility, and also with having the right fatty acids to make intelligent babies.

Also, average faces are beautiful, which you can see for yourself with a program to average faces:

http://www.faceresearch.org/demos/average

 

The reasons for this are due to evolution: beauty is a part of survival. It's all quite logical but most people wouldn't have intuitively come up with these ideas.

 

Your values I think will fall under intuition!

 

Values are your premises, which are based in part on instinct and partly socially taught (explicitly or implicitly). I guess that would fall largely under intuition.

 

Like the sky being blue!

 

That is due to scattering of light by air molecules; the shorter wavelengths are dispersed more. The same explains the colors of the sunset. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/atmos/blusky.html