The nature and history of physics.

[Bluemercury]

Oh dear o. you miss my point and you make it at the same time, there is NO agreed definition its all vague, no one definition ie...crude. im not saying math is crude it is absolute for the most part - minus some smoke and mirrors.

I don't want to have a definition i want to know what the definition is. i thought YOU might know??

 

Silly is not very scientific, i stated a simple truth, is it not true??

 

You may answer these questions directly if you can, but you don't have to, I make no demands of YOU. I respect your knowledge in some fields and will read you answers carefully.

 

My apologies to AndresKiani for getting off topic

 

Thanks for your time and space. anyone for chess...lol Oh dear i just realized that an average PC will beat 99.99999% of humans.

 

You have commented on half of the above post can i assume you agree with the rest.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Bluemercury

[physica]

Bluemurcury I would tone down on the confidence because your whole post screams that you don’t know what science is, you don’t know what maths is and you don’t know how computers work.

 

1. Science is formulating a prediction and testing to see if it works by experiment. If you cannot produce an experiment to test to prediction then it isn’t science. This is why some universities have their theoretical physics departments under the department of mathematics. A good example of the scientific method was Einstein’s theory on entanglement. For a while the experiment couldn’t be designed so the board filed it under philosophy as opposed to science. In time he was actually disproved here and he got it wrong. Yes smart people even get things wrong this is why we apply theories to the scientific method to find out which ones are true and which ones are not. Remember science is the opposite of religion. Sadly you blindly quoted Hawking without any evidence so you’re treating science as a religion. Because someone is an established scientist it doesn’t mean that everything they say is divine truth. We have the scientific method to see if it is true.

 

2. A 10 dollar calculator can compute numbers faster and more accurately than me but cannot do better maths than me. It won’t be able to help me with U substitution; it won’t be able to interpret the meaning behind imaginary numbers or why two answers to a quadratic equation means that antimatter could exist. Your post suggests that you need to read up on what maths is and the difference between computation, arithmetic and maths. Your point about chess doesn’t strengthen your position either. Chess is very algorithmic and the logic behind chess is very simple. The reason why a computer can easily beat a human is that it can calculate millions of moves ahead as opposed to a grand master who can calculate 50 moves ahead. If you try and develop a mathematical model for a physical system you’ll realize that computer can’t really help you that much. Computers are one of the many tools used in science because it is good at a particular thing. Are you going to tell me that a drill is a better builder because it can drill faster and more accurately than the human builder? Is a combine harvester a better farmer because it can harvest crop much cleaner and faster than a human? Or course not there’s more to farming than harvesting crops quickly just like there’s more to maths and science than doing computations quickly and accurately. You have to remember that computers are built and coded by humans.

 

In conclusion you points are fairly useless. All they do is tell me that you don’t understand science, maths or computers. There are social experiments that show that the more confident a person is about something the less they know about it. Your bold statements are no exception.

[Strange]

Reasonable question, i think it would still need to establish the rules, and test certain things, but without our emotional and psychological traits i feel sure it would be more effective at reaching its conclusions, not to mention being somewhat quicker at doing it, it being reaching definitive results.

 

The whole point of the scientific method is to eliminate emotional and psychological biases. In general, it does this extremely well (with occasional, temporary, glitches).

 

I still don't see why you think some sort of emotionless AI (even if such a thing were possible) would make any difference. It is not as if science is a purely intellectual activity which could do without experiment to achieve its goals. How would these AIs be able to run an experiment faster? How would they get to Mars quicker? How would they detect more neutrinos than we can currently?

 

If these AIs were so cold, why would they even bother doing science (or anything). Advances are made by people (emotionally) driven to answer questions and make discoveries.

[Ophiolite]

@physica - thanks for saving me the trouble of responding to Bluemercury's post.

 

@Bluemercury - my reply to your last post is physica's.

 

Now, what is your definition of science. And I am requiring you to reply. It's part of the forum rules.

[Bluemercury]

Thanks for that, ill go to my room and sulk now, ill keep my confidence although ill consider myself "put in my place". As for the rest only time will tell.

 

Unfortunately real life requires my attention. my mind is probably more suited to .....well ill keep that to myself. I sense a defensiveness in some of the above comments.

 

As for me i have nothing more to add.

 

I'm off on holidays now so a merry Christmas to you all.

 

Bluemercury.

 

NO REPLY REQUIRED

Edited December 17, 2014 by Bluemercury

[Ophiolite]

It you return a response to my question is still required under forum rules. No one is putting you in your place, we're just trying to get you to answer the frigging question. Your passive-aggressive bullshit is becoming tiresome.

 

REPLY REQUIRED

[physica]

Thanks for that, ill go to my room and sulk now, ill keep my confidence although ill consider myself "put in my place". As for the rest only time will tell.

 

To be honest no one on this forum is going to lose any sleep over this. It wasn't personal before and it's not personal now. Take what I said however you like it really doesn't matter to me.

 

 

Unfortunately real life requires my attention. my mind is probably more suited to .....well ill keep that to myself. I sense a defensiveness in some of the above comments.

 

You may like to hide behind the fact that this conversation is on the internet to keep your delusion but this is still real life. Hate to break it to you but you are talking to real people who have studied real science degrees and we are talking about real things. You seemed keen and confident to engage when you thought you had the upper hand, what you are doing now sticking your fingers in your ears and repeating to yourself "your not real" over and over again.

 

 

As for me i have nothing more to add.

 

NO REPLY REQUIRED

 

That's a shame. Again the only person losing out is you. No one has learn't anything from you in this particular thread. You have the opportunity to learn, of course you throw it away when you decide to run away if your logic isn't 100% bullet proof. Most people on this forum won't understand your behaviour because we enjoy learning and we are mature enough to swallow our pride when we are shown to be wrong. It's up to you how you develop as a person and it won't affect our lives. Don't kid yourself into thinking that you're punishing anyone but yourself when you say stuff like this.

Edited December 18, 2014 by physica

[Bluemercury]

It you return a response to my question is still required under forum rules. No one is putting you in your place, we're just trying to get you to answer the frigging question. Your passive-aggressive bullshit is becoming tiresome.

 

REPLY REQUIRED

lol goodness me, i thought my responses had been fairly restrained, im not so much passive aggressive more frustrated by the narrow mindedness of some of the comments that have been made. but im having a good laugh right now, you simply do not have the ability to upset me, your inappropriate language however is and should be a concern to someone, very unprofessional, i would also be concerned that o is going to pop a blood vessel. maybe some of his friends above can calm him, i was finished but your rude behavior prompted me to respond. now you can leave it at that or carry on berating me if you like, I think you should stop.

 

I would appeal to the fair minded and reasonable moderates to restrain the inappropriate language that has been displayed, i have backed down already and have no more to say on the original subject if all o has to contribute is insults then he probably should not have a position of authority on this forum. I think he is encouraging others to display the same poor behavior.

 

If anyone would care to count the insults made by me and against me then the statistical analysis will speak for its self, i however do apologize for any perceived hostility, but i was raised by a lawyer and know of no other way to express myself, i was also brought up to be direct but not rude. in another time i would have demanded satisfaction, but.....strangely enough i already have it.

 

AJB you sir seem a fair minded person can you please tell him to let it go, i chose my battles carefully. and want my personal detailed removed if possible to prevent further harassment outside of this forum.

 

Thank you all yes even you, and all the best. feel free to let this conversation end. as it no longer serves any purpose.

Please feel free to delete the entire thing i know longer care is that plain enough for you. i simply had an idea and some questions and well look what its come down too sad.

Sorry for repeating myself but i wanted to make sure im understood.

 

I also give a big apology to the gentlemen who started this thread, i don't know what happened he seems to have followed me here sorry Andres. whatever else is said i will not be responding further i am now going to purge this site from my network all the best to you.

Edited December 19, 2014 by Bluemercury

[Ophiolite]

At no time have I insulted you.

 

The only marginally inappropriate language is the use of frigging in my last post. Given your snide, refusal to adhere to forum rules, coupled with your cowardly withdrawal when things didn't go your way I find "frigging" to be quite mild.

 

I find your suggestion that I might pursue you beyond the bounds of this forum to be grounds for a case of defamation of character. (Ask your father about that.)

 

Now please honour what you claimed you were about to do and leave. Alternatively, answer the frigging question.

[Bluemercury]

Do you not find the word bullshit offensive?

[Strange]

Do you not find the word bullshit offensive?

 

Presumably you are American? I gather this is considered too strong a word to use on, say, television in the US. Hence the euphemism BS, which itself seems to be considered pretty offensive.

 

In the UK, it is not really any more offensive than "nonsense". But if you are truly offended by it, report the post to the moderators. I'm sure they will take your general attitude into account when judging the case ....

[Ophiolite]

Do you not find the word bullshit offensive?

Not nearly as offensive as

1. The bullshit you have been posting
2. Your aggressive attitude
3. Your refusal to follow the forum rules and answer a question
4. And now, your dishonesty in failing to leave the forum as you said you would

Fortunately, I have an alternative to deal with point 4. You are now on Ignore. I must be getting old. I should have thought of that much earlier, but I actually thought you had come here to discuss things.

[physica]

Bluemercury this is a shame. You ignore everything from my last post and focus on the use of one "offensive" word used by Ophiolite. It's as if you want it to be personal.

 

 

lol goodness me,........im not so much passive aggressive more frustrated by the narrow mindedness of some of the comments that have been made. but im having a good laugh right now

You cannot post stuff like this then act like you're the victim when someone replies in a heated tone.

 

 

If anyone would care to count the insults made by me and against me then the statistical analysis will speak for its self,

 

Conservations are not that one dimensional. Again you should study more maths and read up on what defines a good question. How would we quantify it? You could simply count the amount of rude words but this would miss out on your passive aggressive nature. The previous quote are examples that you're not an angel in this conversation. Ophiolite has made points, you outright ignored them, when I rephrased his point in a more direct manner you stated that you were going to sulk and that the real world required your attention. You completely ignored my reply to this... I'm seeing a theme here.

 

 

i was raised by a lawyer and know of no other way to express myself

 

This is a science forum. Science requires a higher form of reasoning than law. With law you can blag it and use technicalities to get a result in a particular case. In science the trial is eternal. Your reasoning has to be very good and it has to stand the test of time and multiple experiments and technological uses of your reasoning. Emotional blagging will not change the outcome of experiments. It is clear that you express yourself like a lawyer because you acting like there's a trial and you're trying to win on technicalities and character attacks.... sorry to break it to you but character attacks and technicalities do not reverse the laws of physics or change the nature of computers. If you want to have fruitful discussions on a science forum you're going to have to improve your reasoning and expression. A lawyer's reasoning and expression will not cut it.

 

 

this conversation end. as it no longer serves any purpose

 

Again this is sad. You could look back at what's been said and learn something. You clearly don't know much about science, computers or maths, you could have used the conversation to ask questions about these and develop yourself. This statement says more about you than the conversation. What you mean is that you had some ideas, I showed you that they stem from a misunderstanding of certain concepts and you tried to make it personal by stating that you were sulking, ignoring further comments that weren't heated, tried to make it more personal by focusing solely on the heated comments and tried attack Ophiolite who was trying to get you to define science, you could have learn't from doing this but instead ignored him, focused on one word, frustrated him then tried to make out that he is a bad person. This conversation serves no purpose for you this because WE are trying to focus on content, learning and idea development.

[Robittybob1]

Not nearly as offensive as

1. The bullshit you have been posting
2. Your aggressive attitude
3. Your refusal to follow the forum rules and answer a question
4. And now, your dishonesty in failing to leave the forum as you said you would

Fortunately, I have an alternative to deal with point 4. You are now on Ignore. I must be getting old. I should have thought of that much earlier, but I actually thought you had come here to discuss things.

You haven't changed!

[physica]

You haven't changed!

How in the world do you think this will develop the thread?? Are you going to be another person who's going to ignore the content that's trying to be developed and just make character assumptions? Well done you managed to further disjoint a thread that I've spent time trying to bring back from petty high school politics pushed by bluemercury, and you manage to ignore that and bring it back to high school politics. I'm not asking for super politeness but at least post something that develops the thread....

 

Why hasn't he changed???

What is wrong with his statement in relation to the thread????

How is his post halted the development of the comments of this thread????

 

You may not like Ophiolite's manner but he is at least posting something that relevant to the thread. What you've done is represents a kid jeering when the "bad guy" comes on stage. This thread isn't titled: previous grievances Robittybob1 has with Ophiolite.

 

If you've got a comment about Ophiolite that offers no development to the thread private message him about it in future, don't undermine mine and everybody-else's efforts to have a discussion about a particular topic. This is basic social skills that should have been taught to you by the age of 12.

[Robittybob1]

How in the world do you think this will develop the thread?? Are you going to be another person who's going to ignore the content that's trying to be developed and just make character assumptions? Well done you managed to further disjoint a thread that I've spent time trying to bring back from petty high school politics pushed by bluemercury, and you manage to ignore that and bring it back to high school politics. I'm not asking for super politeness but at least post something that develops the thread....

 

Why hasn't he changed???

What is wrong with his statement in relation to the thread????

How is his post halted the development of the comments of this thread????

 

You may not like Ophiolite's manner but he is at least posting something that relevant to the thread. What you've done is represents a kid jeering when the "bad guy" comes on stage. This thread isn't titled: previous grievances Robittybob1 has with Ophiolite.

 

If you've got a comment about Ophiolite that offers no development to the thread private message him about it in future, don't undermine mine and everybody-else's efforts to have a discussion about a particular topic. This is basic social skills that should have been taught to you by the age of 12.

All I see is Ophiolite "making" someone leave, and since he didn't he said something about putting him on ignore. He hasn't changed. Best of luck with your conversation.

[Strange]

All I see is Ophiolite "making" someone leave, and since he didn't he said something about putting him on ignore.

 

He didn't make him leave. Bluemercury petulantly said he would leave because people disagreed with him and pointed out his nonsense was ... nonsense.

[physica]

 

He didn't make him leave. Bluemercury petulantly said he would leave because people disagreed with him and pointed out his nonsense was ... nonsense.

I agree he pointed out that he was leaving after Ophiolite said that he seconded my post. You may not like Ophiolite but you can't just make stuff up. It was the truth that stung Bluemercury, if you look at previous posts Bluemercury was willing to chuck passive aggressive insults out until the cows came home. He only got angry when his points were blown from under his feet.

 

For other readers what Robittybob1 and Bluemercury have displayed is the new fashion that seems to be taking society by storm. Looking and analysing content is too hard and there is a risk that you may be caught out so forget the content and just get offended. Hide made up statements behind being a victim and attacking other peoples' character. The following article highlights this issue well, free speech is so out of date right now:

 

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9376232/free-speech-is-so-last-century-todays-students-want-the-right-to-be-comfortable/

 

 

All I see is Ophiolite "making" someone leave, and since he didn't he said something about putting him on ignore. He hasn't changed. Best of luck with your conversation.

If this is all you see then the issue is with you. Sort out your conformation bias issue.

Edited December 19, 2014 by physica

[Robittybob1]

 

He didn't make him leave. Bluemercury petulantly said he would leave because people disagreed with him and pointed out his nonsense was ... nonsense.

That is why I put it in "" to show I didn't mean it as it read. Bluemercury may have felt pressured even without pressure being applied.

 

I agree he pointed out that he was leaving after Ophiolite said that he seconded my post. You may not like Ophiolite but you can't just make stuff up. It was the truth that stung Bluemercury, if you look at previous posts Bluemercury was willing to chuck passive aggressive insults out until the cows came home. He only got angry when his points were blown from under his feet.

 

For other readers what Robittybob1 and Bluemercury have displayed is the new fashion that seems to be taking society by storm. Looking and analysing content is too hard and there is a risk that you may be caught out so forget the content and just get offended. Hide made up statements behind being a victim and attacking other peoples' character. The following article highlights this issue well, free speech is so out of date right now:

 

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9376232/free-speech-is-so-last-century-todays-students-want-the-right-to-be-comfortable/

 

 

If this is all you see then the issue is with you. Sort out your conformation bias issue.

 

My comment was for Ophiolite principally, I'm sure he will know what I mean.

[Ophiolite]

Two newly-wed neutrons walk into a bar and the bartender says, "I don't get it, what's the attraction?"

 

Meanwhile, back on the ranch, it interesting that one of the principal axioms of science is that the physical constants are the same, not only over time, but in all parts of the universe as well. This has been questioned from time to time, tested - as far as it can be tested - and generally confirmed. Moreover, as I understand it, if it were not true many of our other observations would not be as they are, so many experiments incidentally confirm it.

 

Now, taking a leaf from the book of the cranks and the woo-woo agents, I have a theory. Is their any chance that the red shift we attribute to expansion of the universe could be related to a systematic variation of one or other of the fundamental constants? I imagine this is either trivially ruled out, or was refuted by experiment long ago. I'm interested in knowing what rules it out. Can anyone explain to me, ideally in pop-science terms, with an equation or two thrown in, so I can pretend to be smart?

[elfmotat]

Now, taking a leaf from the book of the cranks and the woo-woo agents, I have a theory. Is their any chance that the red shift we attribute to expansion of the universe could be related to a systematic variation of one or other of the fundamental constants? I imagine this is either trivially ruled out, or was refuted by experiment long ago. I'm interested in knowing what rules it out. Can anyone explain to me, ideally in pop-science terms, with an equation or two thrown in, so I can pretend to be smart?

 

The most important constant for cosmological red-shift would be the gravitational constant G. The most straightforward way to consider variable constants is to promote them to scalar fields. This is exactly what, for example, Brans-Dicke gravity does. The constant 1/G is replaced by a scalar field [math]\phi (x^{\mu} )[/math]. Brans-Dicke gravity has pretty much been ruled out -- the tunable parameter [math]\omega[/math] must be >40,000 to be consistent with current observations. But with a value that large its predictions are basically indistinguishable from General Relativity, so it doesn't solve any problems dealing with red-shifts. One recovers GR as [math]\omega \to \infty[/math]. A very large but finite value for [math]\omega[/math] would be incredibly strange, and seems unnatural. So not only is a variable gravitational constant pretty much ruled out, but even if it weren't it wouldn't help explain the apparent expansion of the universe.

Edited December 20, 2014 by elfmotat

[Ophiolite]

Well, I understood almost none of that, but I appreciate the reply. I shall spend some time looking up the terms you've mentioned, while trying to fight the natural indolence that has kept me from understanding physics until now. (I deny that it has anything to do with limits on my intellect.)

[Mordred]

Been awhile since I read any Brans-Dick gravity articles lol almost forgot about that theory