fredrik

This is my very first post here, and this is kind of experimental, I really don't know what to expect at all. I am interested in a few different things, often from a the philosophical angle. I've got some personal big long term projects, and many minor transient projects which expect for providing fun, serves as excellent model projects for some of my long term projects. Find the theory of everything, isn't that what we all strive for? Meanwhile there is alot of fun things. I'm simply curious too see what kind of knowledge is on here. Are the people on here typically students that go here to discusse course contents or what? Some of my interestes are fermentation science (yeast), learning science, philosophy of science, theoretical physics. Of course, to me they are nothing but different angles of the very same core, and I belive in analysis from all reachable angles. I am not a student (though I used to be one: physics, math, comp sci), nor do I work with science. To me science and it's philosophy is a fundamental thing, transcending work and transient stuff. As long as there is a way, I'd like to not have anything interfere with it. I am one of those guys that used to think when I was in school that physics, math and chemistry are the good stuff and biology is merely an application of the former and alot of boring empricial findings. I used the reductionist approach to it's extreme. I abandoned my planned chemistry studies in favour of physics, and I ended up feeding only on the theoretical and philosophical parts of that as well. Eventually the fundamentals and other working on string theory triggered my baloney indicator again. It's not that it could be proven wrong, it just wasn't the answer to the question I would ask. The wrong question was asked, and I found no point in spending my life trying to answer the wrong question. Then I come to realized I really missed something essential. The essence of life. Biology went from rotten leaves, to something amazing. Then I realized that at this other extreme, I kind of hit the same core as in the opposite direction. Fundamentals of particle physics, the nature of the elements, dimensions and time. Fundamentals of the so called "laws" of nature. Fundamentals of life, and the nature of creation, conscioussness. Intuitively the connection is obvious, yet there are plenty of things to work out. Evolution of life, and growth of science are sort of special cases of the same thing to me. It's this thing I want. I want the abstraction of the abstraction, and hope to find the commong inductive step. Because life to me isn't static. We, they, everything is kind of in motion. Objective absoluteness is unreal to me. Or, an idealized concept at best, useful in applications. So if everything is so damn fuzzy, and nothing is real, how can things still be so apparently real? I think I will never find the answer. But I think I may find the rule that will tell me what is the most clever "next step" in my quest. That's really the best I can accopmlish. I don't know where I'm going, but I always know where I will place my next footstep. I want to understand the logic, philosophy and science of that very process. I admit it is still a kind of reductionist approach, only that I think this time the focus is not on the absolute, but on the exploration of the unknown as beeing fundamental concept. /Fredrik