Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Strange last won the day on August 5

Strange had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

4242 Glorious Leader

About Strange

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location
  • College Major/Degree
  • Favorite Area of Science
  • Occupation

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Not entirely true. But so what? I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. When science produces a result it is equally valid whatever your personal ideas are. We all benefit from scientific progress (unless you reject it). Nice straw man. No one said that. But the fact that equality can be proved, means that we can have a certain level of confidence in the consistency of models. It is then a matter of comparing that model (the map) to observations (the terrain) and refining it as necessary. When it comes to science, for example gravity or evolution, we do not each have a unique model. If you are talking about views outside of science, then, well... duh and thank you, Captain Obvious. One of the roles of philosophy is to explore what the roots of belief and knowledge are. (As someone who knew anything at all about philosophy would know.) So hardly irrelevant. (And I think most people with some understanding of philosophy or science would say that knowledge can never be complete.) Many people have attempted, with varying degrees of success, to put philosophy on a formal basis starting from fixed definitions. Some very interesting results have come from such work. Christ. Give us some warning when you are about to throw in a non-sequitur like that. I think the sudden change of direction has given me whiplash. Please provide some evidence that "most people" believe this. So you don't believe in "laws" but you do believe in "logic" underlying reality. Would that be the "laws of logic", by any chance.
  2. Talking of species, as we were in another thread, the idea that two species cannot inter-breed or hybridise is shown to be false in many examples. Here is an amazing example of a hybrid of two different species that are also from two different genera, and even different families: https://www.quantamagazine.org/extra-dna-may-make-unlikely-hybrid-fish-possible-20200805/
  3. I think one subtle point that is often overlooked, and can be important, is that "species" is an arbitrary distinction invented by humans for ease of categorising and cataloguing organisms. It doesn't't really correspond to anything specific in nature. For example, Darwin's finches are biologically isolated (hence regarded as different species) mainly by geographical separation. In many cases, they could interbreed if brought together. So, even though "inability to breed" is commonly thought of as the definition of species, it is only part of it. A number of different factors are used to help draw the (arbitrary) line between populations. (This obviously relates to the chicken-and-egg discussion in another thread.)
  4. This, rather sadly, demonstrates your ignorance of science. A "theory" in science is the closest we get to "true"; it means a detailed idea or explanation that is supported by evidence. In the case of evolution by natural selection (the Wallace-Darwin theory), this is one of the theories with the most evidence and a well-understood mechanism. There is literally no justification for rejecting it. ! Moderator Note This sort of preaching is against the rules. Do not do it again.
  5. It would be quite easy to write a script to test this. (But I’m not going to!) It reminds me of the Collatz Conjecture, which has been described as the most dangerous idea in mathematics
  6. I guess you mean “finches”? They were different species because they were biologically isolated. They had different diets and, therefore, different beaks
  7. And it only uses the first link, not the “best” so it only specifies an upper bound
  8. IDoNotCare has been suspended for two weeks for hijacking threads with nonsensical posts and then arguing about it. And if they choose not to come back? I do not care
  9. Strange

    Today I Learned

    Indeed. There is nothing special about Charlemagne in this respect. It is equally true for a downtrodden peasant in rural Transylvania. When you are little and you think about your ancestors, you soon run into the ancestor paradox: you have two parents and 4 grandparents and 8 greatgrandparents and ... Which leads to questions like: How come the population in the past wasn't bigger than today? "Strangers are just relatives you haven't met yet" https://www.nature.com/articles/news990311-2
  10. There are one or two people who think reality "is" math. But they are very much in the minority. Cladking just likes to pretend everyone else is wrong because it make him feel smart.
  11. Strange

    Biden’s VP Choice

    ! Moderator Note Incoherent hijack split off to Trash
  12. Colourless green ideas sleep furiously
  13. As you are unwilling to say what you are dividing we can only guess
  14. But why 928? I assume "because it works" in whatever bizarre numerological delusion you are involved in. There is no "of course" about it. And what over c5? If you mean lp, then dividing a length by a speed to the 5th power does not give a time. You need to do some basic dimensional analysis, instead of just throwing random numbers around. Do you want to try that again in English? What does "comparing speeds of light" mean? There is only one speed of light: c == c. The denominator of what? What is a "wavevolume"? What photon? How much is it redshifted? When you are writing in incomplete sentences, in broken English, and making up words and numbers with no explanation, stop adding "of course". This is, of course, frobnitz. WHAT equation? You could have saved time by posting it in Trash
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.