Stephen Hawking gets a Pats jersey

[PatsFanSince74]

Interesting. Do you see a big difference between that type of belief and someone who believes in an eternal supreme being?

Welcome to the history of western philosophy and knowledge theory from the Presocratics to Plato and Aristotle to Aquinas to Rationalism, Empiricism and the Kantian synthesis to Heidegger, Wittgenstein, Logical Empiricism, Phenomenology, the disciplines broadly defined as the Philosophy of Science and a few other "isms" and "ologies" that I've left out.

I've read or studied them all and the best answer to your question that I can come up with is, "Meh. Maybe. Maybe not."

 

[ViperGTS]

Interesting. Do you see a big difference between that type of belief and someone who believes in an eternal supreme being?

I'd say there is , but there are many problems with every viewpoint. For instance the main problem is what started it all? We are used to finite things. Therefore there must be a start and and end when it comes to the universe, which is an impossible idea to process. I lean more towards the scientific methods and there are answers I don't believe we will ever have. The prime one for me is where did the first atom come from? How is something created from nothing? What is nothing? If there is a "creator", what came before him? Or her for that matter.

Keep your eyes open. Things may suprise you.

 

[archstanton543]

Just testing out my new avatar.

 

[The Brandon Five]

I'd say there is , but there are many problems with every viewpoint. For instance the main problem is what started it all? We are used to finite things. Therefore there must be a start and and end when it comes to the universe, which is an impossible idea to process. I lean more towards the scientific methods and there are answers I don't believe we will ever have. The prime one for me is where did the first atom come from? How is something created from nothing? What is nothing? If there is a "creator", what came before him? Or her for that matter.

Keep your eyes open. Things may suprise you.

What scientific method lead you to believe in multiple universes? There is no physical/observable evidence of that.

My favorite question is: once they find the most elementary component of matter (a sub-quark), what is that made of? I think it's Spam.

 

[The Brandon Five]

Really?

Two unverifiable beliefs. What is it you are missing?

 

[Galeb]

What scientific method lead you to believe in multiple universes? There is no physical/observable evidence of that.

My favorite question is: once they find the most elementary component of matter (a sub-quark), what is that made of? I think it's Spam.

If the universe were fractal in nature, there would be no smallest particle. Fractal patters are self similar across infinite scales.

 

[The Brandon Five]

If the universe were fractal in nature, there would be no smallest particle. Fractal patters are self similar across infinite scales.

What are the fractals made of?

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Two unverifiable beliefs. What is it you are missing?

Ah. What can we say that we "know" at all. How much is, as Kant styled it, the "already out there now real" and how much is our imposing a structure on reality? And what about those things that we have to change even to be able to observe them in the first place?

And "time," what's with that? Did you ever notice how our perception of time can be altered significantly by the chemical composition of our blood? Is it more than just football jargon that the game "slows down" for the great quarterbacks? Is there something about how they interact with reality that's different than others? Same for the great hitters in baseball who say they can see the seams on the ball almost stop rotating as it comes to the plate

Our very perception of reality is largely a complex set of assumptions that we weave together in a familiar manner.

I once had a brilliant (but marginally sane) Philosophy Prof, who posed this scenario: "Now suppose, Mr. X, that you had kept a parakeet in your home for a year or so, feeding and caring for it. Then, one day, in front of your eyes, it exploded. What might you conclude? Would you conclude that it was not a parakeet in the first place or that you now know something new about parakeets, namely that "they explode?'"

I stopped studying Philosophy and got an MBA, but I've never been able to answer that question, with all its ramifications, to my satisfaction.

Maybe I should just blame this post on 4/20?

 

[BlueThunder]

As far as the game slowing down...could it possibly be that our brain processing power speeds up ?...maybe due to chemical composition of our blood... what, if anything, does adrenaline have to do with it?

In the long run, I probably will have to wait for my next life to find out

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I once had a brilliant (but marginally sane) Philosophy Prof, who posed this scenario: "Now suppose, Mr. X, that you had kept a parakeet in your home for a year or so, feeding and caring for it. Then, one day, in front of your eyes, it exploded. What might you conclude? Would you conclude that it was not a parakeet in the first place or that you now know something new about parakeets, namely that "they explode?'"

That depends on whether you fed it popcorn.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

What are the fractals made of?

Turtles all the way down.

 

[Galeb]

What are the fractals made of?

Waves?

 

[BlueThunder]

mini fractals ?

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

String theory is so au courant. It embodies what is considered beautiful mathematics, well beyond my ken. However, so far it has not made any falsifiable predictions and thus fails the test of being actual science. Nice for philosophical jerking off though.

 

[1960Pats]

I have this vision of Goodell with his head up his butt, being sucked into himself, with all that remains being a singularity.

Here he is at the early stage of the transformation...

 

[zydecochris]

String theory is so au courant. It embodies what is considered beautiful mathematics, well beyond my ken. However, so far it has not made any falsifiable predictions and thus fails the test of being actual science. Nice for philosophical jerking off though.

Thanks for the chuckle.

I'm an experimentalist, so I have similar views of theory (string) that can't be experimentally verified. However, I suggest that if you voice your opinions about string theory not being "actual science" in a typical Ivy League physics department, I wouldn't let any theoreticians know where you are parked, and you might want to check your tires before driving off to make sure they haven't been (wait for it...) deflated.

 

[Galeb]

String theory is so au courant. It embodies what is considered beautiful mathematics, well beyond my ken. However, so far it has not made any falsifiable predictions and thus fails the test of being actual science. Nice for philosophical jerking off though.

Recent findings by the Planck satellite confirming an even distribution of matter and energy across the known universe have dealt a huge blow to both the string theory and multiverse theories. That said, philosophical masturbation is a worthwhile endeavor.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Thanks for the chuckle.

I'm an experimentalist, so I have similar views of theory (string) that can't be experimentally verified. However, I suggest that if you voice your opinions about string theory not being "actual science" in a typical Ivy League physics department, I wouldn't let any theoreticians know where you are parked, and you might want to check your tires before driving off to make sure they haven't been (wait for it...) deflated.

I note your jocular tone but it illustrates that science which I love is still a human endeavor where human beings with their internal beliefs and emotions exert a strong influence. We definitely need and advance science by theoreticians but when they wander afar unbridled by carefully reproduced experimentalists' data it's "Danger Will Robinson!" time.

 

[Wordsmyth]

String theory is so au courant. It embodies what is considered beautiful mathematics, well beyond my ken. However, so far it has not made any falsifiable predictions and thus fails the test of being actual science. Nice for philosophical jerking off though.

Or a good plot for a thriller.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

I love thinking about multiverse stuff. What set me down that track was quantum theory (and experiment) where photons do funny stuff in the single slit then double slit experiment. A guy named Hugh Everett formulated his many worlds hypothethis based on this.

Between thinking about this and wasting even more time watching catfight videos posted by Joker in another thread I'm getting nothing done.