Find fields & stores near you!
Find fields and stores
Zipcode
PbNation News
PbNation News
Community Focus
Community Focus

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-11-2014, 06:46 PM #85
CAOL_98
Ego User
 
CAOL_98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Wyoming
CAOL_98 owns a Planet Eclipse Ego
CAOL_98 owns a Planet Eclipse Lv1
I don't really think it has to be rationalized...we always strive to pick apart everything around us so that we might be more content in having all of the answers...why not just be content with belief?
__________________
-CAOL MARQ CLAN

"This sport transcends all expectations. I thank God for this gift and the friends I have made playing."
CAOL_98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sponsored Links Remove Advertisement
Advertisement
Old 01-11-2014, 06:56 PM #86
F1VENOM
 
 
F1VENOM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by ironyusa View Post
Lol. I know your educational background and that makes you feel secure over the internet, but I have worked with some of the leading minds at MIT and JHU. You have a flawed comprehension of the basic building blocks of applied physics and particularly the margin of error that arises in higher order models. I even talked to one of the physicists I work with and she couldn't even understand the basis of your objection. At some point it doesn't matter because it's just the internet and we don't know each other well, but my/ my teams' "theories" are doing their mission all over the globe. In order to build the software algorithms that use these theories, we obviously know the limitations quite well and have to account for them. I don't have a degree in physics, but for you to deny the inherent uncertainty of higher order mathematical models is ludacris (and is what you did).
Why don't you go ahead and lay out your QM argument again.
F1VENOM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 07:04 PM #87
ironyusa
reappropriating resources
 
ironyusa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Dallas, TX
Quote:
Originally Posted by F1VENOM View Post
Why don't you go ahead and lay out your QM argument again.
Doesn't matter... I deleted that post because at the end of the day it's the internet.

My argument was based around the fact that there is a hierarchy in data/ mathematical structure. It starts with discrete measurements, builds into inferential models, then higher order models arise to incorporate one or more inferential models. As you build more complex models, they're inherently less accurate.

Also, Steven Hawking's notion that physics will render God obsolete was unfounded.
__________________
New ideas being shown at: inceptionforums.com

Last edited by ironyusa : 01-11-2014 at 07:06 PM.
ironyusa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 07:09 PM #88
F1VENOM
 
 
F1VENOM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by ironyusa View Post
Doesn't matter... I deleted that post because at the end of the day it's the internet.

My argument was based around the fact that there is a hierarchy in data/ mathematical structure. It starts with discrete measurements, builds into inferential models, then higher order models arise as a product of one or more inferential models. As you build more complex models, they're inherently less accurate.
If I remember correctly you were trying to ascribe things to the uncertainty principle in a way that didn't make sense. If you're unwilling to go back through the whole mess maybe you shouldn't park those loaded quips.

EDIT: or you could toss out some more.

Last edited by F1VENOM : 01-11-2014 at 07:16 PM.
F1VENOM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 07:23 PM #89
ironyusa
reappropriating resources
 
ironyusa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Dallas, TX
Quote:
Originally Posted by F1VENOM View Post
If I remember correctly you were trying to ascribe things to the uncertainty principle in a way that didn't make sense. If you're unwilling to go back through the whole mess maybe you shouldn't park those loaded quips.

EDIT: or you could toss out some more.
It's all right there. I just posted it. That was the entire point that I was trying to make and that you took exception to. Going back to the double slot experiment. The data at the collection point is discrete. How it got there is speculative because you can't isolate the effects of the measurement system. The mathematical models are inferential. Nothing changes those facts. The inferential models themselves can't be verified, giving birth to several explanations (duality, blah blah). I don't understand how any of that is objectionable.

Not everyone buys the fact that science and religion are exclusive which is where the Hawkings comment spurred it all.

Am I religious? Yes. Do I have faith? Sure, but everyone believes something that will never be fully proved. That was why the discussion took place. Hawkings made a strong assertion that oversteps the credible bounds of science and walks the line of agnostic doctrine.
__________________
New ideas being shown at: inceptionforums.com
ironyusa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 07:33 PM #90
F1VENOM
 
 
F1VENOM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
 has been a member for 10 years
That isn't all of it and if you've conveniently deleted the post I'll take that as a concession.

It's interesting that you didn't post the whole thing.

Quote:
"One can't prove that God doesn't exist,"*professor Stephen Hawking*told ABC News. "But science makes God unnecessary. "The laws of physics can explain the universe without the need for a creator," he added.
F1VENOM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 07:40 PM #91
ironyusa
reappropriating resources
 
ironyusa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Dallas, TX
Take it however you want... you will anyway. Which is why I made the internet comment. I deleted the long post you quoted so it didn't turn into this again (but I was too late obviously).

Real scientists should object to that quote.
__________________
New ideas being shown at: inceptionforums.com
ironyusa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 07:43 PM #92
F1VENOM
 
 
F1VENOM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by ironyusa View Post
Take it however you want... you will anyway. Which is why I made the internet comment. I deleted the long post you quoted so it didn't turn into this again (but I was too late obviously).

Real scientists should object to that quote.
So you're willing to assert but unwilling to expand?

Why, because Hawking has yet another controversial opinion and represents the scientific community as a whole?
F1VENOM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 07:44 PM #93
Umami
"That guy"
 
Umami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Inside the Beltway
Umami supports our troops
Quote:
Originally Posted by ironyusa
Lol. I know your educational background and that makes you feel secure over the internet, but I have worked with some of the leading minds at MIT and JHU. You have a flawed comprehension of the basic building blocks of applied physics and particularly the margin of error that arises in higher order models. I even talked to one of the physicists I work with and she couldn't even understand the basis of your objection.
Recalling what you've said in the past, I suspect if you went into greater detail on your position she would understand the objection.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ironyusa View Post
Real scientists should object to that quote.
There are, indeed, no true scotsmen.

And necessity is entirely subjective, so there is nothing wrong with that statement.
__________________
Everything great in the world is done by neurotics; they alone founded our religions and created our masterpieces.

SOG
I am affiliated with Lurker Paintball. My opinions are my own and do not reflect those of LurkerPB.

Last edited by Umami : 01-11-2014 at 07:52 PM.
Umami is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 07:55 PM #94
ironyusa
reappropriating resources
 
ironyusa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Dallas, TX
Quote:
Originally Posted by F1VENOM View Post
So you're willing to assert but unwilling to expand?

Why, because Hawking has yet another controversial opinion and represents the scientific community as a whole?
Again, the whole of my intent is summarized in the post above. Perhaps my mistake was an attemp to package it in physics lingo, but I stand by my original intent.

Unfortunately, Hawkings has become a spokesman for theoretical physics. I haven't seen a reprimand from the larger collective body discouraging the passing off of such opinions as fact.

Umami, I don't follow the Scotsman comment.

While I understand the subjective statement, "necessary" carries with it quite a few inferences. How far down the line do we take God's exclusion? Stop at the big bang?

Also, I do apologize for the snide remark. (f1ve)
__________________
New ideas being shown at: inceptionforums.com

Last edited by ironyusa : 01-11-2014 at 08:01 PM.
ironyusa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 08:04 PM #95
F1VENOM
 
 
F1VENOM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
 has been a member for 10 years
I guess I'm just not understanding as you made a pretty incredible assertion which seems to overstep the bounds of your ability to articulate it and then proceed to fault Hawking for repeating an assertion he's wrote several books on.

Hawking hasn't really been taken seriously for a while. If you went at Tyson or Krauss I could see it but Hawking is passe.

He's talking about that logical fallacy you dropped with the, "real scientist" comment.
F1VENOM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 08:13 PM #96
Umami
"That guy"
 
Umami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Inside the Beltway
Umami supports our troops
Quote:
Originally Posted by ironyusa View Post
Umami, I don't follow the Scotsman comment.

While I understand the subjective statement, "necessary" carries with it quite a few inferences. How far down the line do we take God's exclusion? Stop at the big bang?
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

I have no idea what you mean by "how far down". Hawking is asserting that we know enough about the universe to do away with creation myths.

Again, it's not a scientific position.

Quote:
Originally Posted by F1VENOM View Post
I guess I'm just not understanding as you made a pretty incredible assertion which seems to overstep the bounds of your ability to articulate it
This is why this conversation is frustrating. You've taken some extremely fringe positions fairly strongly, but havent demonstrated even enough understanding on the topic to coherently articulate your position.

Were it only an assertion about propagation of uncertainty or something along those lines (which I suspect your colleague assumed) we wouldn't be having this conversation. But it is my understanding that you believe direct measurements at accellerators are somehow "beyond" the scope of physics, which is just...odd.
__________________
Everything great in the world is done by neurotics; they alone founded our religions and created our masterpieces.

SOG
I am affiliated with Lurker Paintball. My opinions are my own and do not reflect those of LurkerPB.

Last edited by Umami : 01-11-2014 at 08:34 PM.
Umami is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 08:15 PM #97
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Isn't Tyson just a TV personality?
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 08:19 PM #98
F1VENOM
 
 
F1VENOM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch View Post
Isn't Tyson just a TV personality?
That would be Brian Greene or Bill Nye, Tyson's pretty legit.
F1VENOM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 08:24 PM #99
Umami
"That guy"
 
Umami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Inside the Beltway
Umami supports our troops
Brian Greene is pretty well published. Tyson doesn't do much anymore.

Edit: but he is a legit astrophysicist.
__________________
Everything great in the world is done by neurotics; they alone founded our religions and created our masterpieces.

SOG
I am affiliated with Lurker Paintball. My opinions are my own and do not reflect those of LurkerPB.

Last edited by Umami : 01-11-2014 at 08:28 PM.
Umami is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 08:30 PM #100
F1VENOM
 
 
F1VENOM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umami View Post
Brian Greene is pretty well published. Tyson doesn't do much anymore.
Yeah but string theory, they might as well be fairy tales.

Tyson certainly is more of a political person but they all have solid pedigree. I guess Bill Nye is the largest TV personality of them all.
F1VENOM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 08:40 PM #101
Umami
"That guy"
 
Umami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Inside the Beltway
Umami supports our troops
True, I guess I see those guys as more mathmaticians than physicists.
__________________
Everything great in the world is done by neurotics; they alone founded our religions and created our masterpieces.

SOG
I am affiliated with Lurker Paintball. My opinions are my own and do not reflect those of LurkerPB.
Umami is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 08:46 PM #102
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
I asssumed he gets put out there because he is one of those well articulated smart black guys.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 08:52 PM #103
Umami
"That guy"
 
Umami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Inside the Beltway
Umami supports our troops
He's very intelligent and accomplished.

He gets put out there because he's also personable and willing to do it, a rare cluster of attributes in the field.
__________________
Everything great in the world is done by neurotics; they alone founded our religions and created our masterpieces.

SOG
I am affiliated with Lurker Paintball. My opinions are my own and do not reflect those of LurkerPB.
Umami is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 08:54 PM #104
F1VENOM
 
 
F1VENOM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umami View Post
True, I guess I see those guys as more mathmaticians than physicists.
When you're fully in the realm of topology that's a fair assessment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch View Post
I asssumed he gets put out there because he is one of those well articulated smart black guys.
He's been the director of the Hayden Planetarium since 1996, was on the NASA steering committee as well as congressional committees and of course NOVA documentaries and articles in a couple of magazines. He's out there because he wants to be, the rest probably gives him more reach.
F1VENOM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 09:15 PM #105
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
You guys should know that the only exposure I even have to him is a Colbert clip that I "absolutely have to see" you know how those go, and a TED talk I made about 5-7 minutes into. Setting aside the meme crap from that lame "I ****ing love science" page that everyone seems to have an irresistible urge to share everything that's posted there.

but thanks for the info.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
Forum Jump