New book calls science a "Priesthood"

Discussion in 'Science & Society' started by rpenner, Dec 24, 2011.

  1. Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    Arrow = the direction of anything you like, in this case Gravity. It means to point, it means direction, pointer... go there.

    Many quote answers do not work, I can't see the relationship to my answers, and your questions. The site is yours, you should know that the code does not let me read my own quotes in your replies. So I can't see what you are asking me without scrolling up, and down the screen all over the place.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,286
    Pincho Paxton:

    So, if I understand you correctly, you're saying that the directions of everything in physics are wrong. Is that correct? Please back this up with examples and appropriate mathematics, immediately.

    As for quotes, try this:

    Select the text of the post you wish to quote (including your own quotes). Hit CTRL-C. That tells your computer that you wish to copy the selected text.

    Now, hit the "post reply" button at the bottom of the thread.

    Select the box that pops up, and hit CTRL-V. That tells your computer to paste the previously-copied text into the reply box.

    Problem solved.

    I'm a little surprised that a genius such as yourself hasn't managed to work this out for himself.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    CTRL-C, CTRL-V doesn't work properly either.. I already worked that out.

    Yes the directions of almost everything are wrong.
    I use logic. Logic which is beyond you. Is it a ban-able offence to be beyond understanding?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. RichW9090 Evolutionist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    151
    Yes, it ought to be a banable offence to be beyond understanding. This is a Forum - a place where people come to disuss, argue, debate - all of which requires understanding and being understandable.

    Those who can't meet thoes rather minimal qualifications have no place here.
     
  8. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,286
    Pincho Paxton:

    You have not posted your examples and mathematics.

    Please post them now.
     
  9. Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    Math's is science's biggest mistake, I refuse to follow the priesthood. The universe doesn't use maths, so I don't use maths, I use propagation of particles. Being as we have computers nowadays we can evaluate the universe from the particle level.
     
  10. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,286
  11. gmilam Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,504
    Sure you can - after you plug the formulas in. :bugeye:
     
  12. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425

    I in no way endorse what PP is saying, but I will make a comment in response to your response.


    If I recorded a video of some apples on a table, and then a hand grabs some apples and takes them off the table, how many apples are on the table?

    You seem to not understand what the purpose of math is. Math is to physics as language is to thoughts. Math is to describe reality the best it can. Math itself is not reality. The apples on the table are reality. The 4-2=2 is to describe reality.
     
  13. gmilam Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,504
    As a programmer, I can tell you that a program is also not reality. In actuality, a computer is a very stupid machine. For a computer to do anything someone has to write a program. The instructions contained in that program are going to be in the form of... (you guessed it...) mathematical equations.
     
  14. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    That's great, a computer operates according to a set of instructions. Are you trying to say that in order for apples to be on the table, and then some of the apples taken off the table, that math needs to exist?
     
  15. gmilam Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,504
    No, I'm trying to say that for PP to use computers to model the actions of particles, he's going to have to be able to describe them mathematically. Duh!
     
  16. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    Yeah, that is true, but you would also have to have math to use a computer to describe apples on a table. That doesn't mean math is essential to reality. The reality is, apples are there and then some are consumed whether or not you have math. Math is not required for the universe to exist and be in motion. To imply otherwise is absurd.
     
  17. gmilam Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,504
    This is an argument I've never made. I'm fully aware that math is a language we use to describe reality. I am also fully aware that it's the same language a computer uses. I was responding to PP's claim that he doesn't need math because he can use a computer to evaluate the universe.

    Do you see his disconnect here?
     
  18. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    Yes, I already said that's true. My point is that math attempts to describe reality the best it can, and the universe doesn't need math to function, nor does math describe the universe 100% accurately. There is no math that can describe the waves of the ocean, the leaves blowing in a forest, or the motion of a deer in the woods from 12:00-1:00 in the heat of the rut!

    Math is an attempt to describe reality. The reality is that you can't split an apple, or anything, into equal parts. Impossible. That is only a bad illusion. The reality is, no two apples are the same.
     
  19. gmilam Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,504
    OK? I fail to see the connection with my original comment. I do understand the purpose of math. It is used to describe reality. It is also the language a computer speaks... Therefore, if PP wishes to use a computer... (I'll let you put 2 & 2 together here...)
     
  20. Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    My equations have no goals however. What is 100 million apples + 100 million apples?

    Well, the apples collapse under their own weight. And my point is that maths says 200 million.

    In other words, I don't use direct maths, I try to copy particles exactly so that certain mathematical rules do not happen. Vectors for example should not happen through grain structures. The grain structure is too hap-hazzard to get a straight line vector.

    So to avoid all risk of getting a false answer I just use the number 6. I know that a particle needs to obey newtons Law, and I know that you can get 6 particles around 1 particle, so to obey Newtons Laws I have confirmed the use of the number 6. It is hard to confirm anything else.
     
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2012
  21. gmilam Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,504
    Not if you lay them out on a single plane.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    You know, when Lucille Ball had to work up a comedy skit around doing a task, like throwing pizza dough, she learned how to throw a pizza crust properly. Only then could she do it wrong and make it funny.

    I think it might help your act if you learned the proper approach first.
     
  22. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    Plugging in formulas is an ATTEMPT to describe reality. Math does not describe reality accurately.

    I could use crayons to draw a picture of 4 apples and describe reality better than ANY formula you can produce.
     
  23. Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    Yes, so you agree that maths doesn't work. There are variations in the physics.
     

Share This Page