Jump to content

Can Science be my religion?


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Lasse said:

Could you provide an example where the mathematical recognition is absolutetly has no relation to Nature? 

There are classes of mathematical functions that have an infinite number of dimensions, i.e. they are all orthogonal to each other (e.g. Legendre polynomials). We don't have an infinite number of physical dimensions.

4 hours ago, Lasse said:

Could you think without your brain? Could you have any mathematical recognition without it?

non sequitur

2 minutes ago, Lasse said:

Did not say that. I pointed that back than people seek to understand the nature of the physical reality. I.e. primitive physics presented through e.g. the Greek philosophers.. 

You said physics, and we're discussing science. 3000 years ago, we did not have science. As you acknowledge, these were philosophers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 182
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

! Moderator Note We're done with this. If you've read 8 pages of people telling you why science doesn't equal religion and can still make this statement, it's clear you aren't li

Interesting point. My sense is that, if it is possible to calculate in such high dimensions with mathematics, than it is just showing the potential of mathematics and by that at least it should b

I agree, with the exception of "religions have no evidence to support what they claim". It would be more accurate to say they have 'no evidence to support much of or some of what they claim'. It is no

Posted Images

58 minutes ago, swansont said:

You said physics, and we're discussing science. 3000 years ago, we did not have science. As you acknowledge, these were philosophers.

They were the first ones seek to understand Nature.

Some of their questions still makes me think...

It was a pre(different) state of science.

58 minutes ago, swansont said:
Quote

Could you think without your brain? Could you have any mathematical recognition without it?

non sequitur

Mathematics fundamentally connected to the physical reality.

Try to recognize something without it if you are looking for non sequitur. Or deny it's absolute necessity. 

Nature is the final source of information. Reality.

How we think is Reality in every moment of spacetime.

Digitally can even last forever... and I should not have believe in, that there is something to work for and it is achievable through Science. 

I like Scientific Clarity specially at it's fundamentals...

It worth a question and a Honest (believed to be the best) answer. 

 

Edited by Lasse
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, dimreepr said:

my point is the future is unknown and there's no guarantee technology will be available to do the reading.

Obviously true. But not relevant because there will have been a time between "everything is on floppy disks" and "everything is on memory sticks"  when both formats were widely available and, if the data was important, it would have been copied to the new format.

6 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Besides what about that all-important floppy that was worth hiding for safekeeping and is forgotten about for n years?

Was it all important or forgotten about?
It can't have been both.


Incidentally, if you need to read a file from an 8 inch floppy disk I still have a couple of drives and I guess these days someone would hook up an arduino or some such to handle  the interfacing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, swansont said:

infinite number of dimensions,

What is proving this?

And that it is true at the present time?

The Future, since it did not happened yet, you can not count.

 

Edited by Lasse
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, swansont said:

There are classes of mathematical functions that have an infinite number of dimensions, i.e. they are all orthogonal to each other (e.g. Legendre polynomials). We don't have an infinite number of physical dimensions

If the second is true how the first can be true? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lasse said:

If the second is true how the first can be true? 

As far as I can tell, that's the point.
You think that stuff in maths has to represent some sort of reality.

But there are things in maths that are clearly non-physical.

 

You don't understand how that can happen because you don't understand that you are wrong.
I used to spend a bit of my time at work calculating angles in 256 dimensions.

They weren't real (obviously) but the maths still works just fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John Cuthber said:

As far as I can tell, that's the point.
You think that stuff in maths has to represent some sort of reality.

But there are things in maths that are clearly non-physical.

 

You don't understand how that can happen because you don't understand that you are wrong.
I used to spend a bit of my time at work calculating angles in 256 dimensions.

They weren't real (obviously) but the maths still works just fine.

Interesting point.

My sense is that, if it is possible to calculate in such high dimensions with mathematics, than it is just showing the potential of mathematics and by that at least it should be able to express the recognisable physical reality.

Clearly for the masses including me...

I wanna see reality and I would like to count with it. 

I see that our sciences dealing with as much information (reality) as they are able to perceive. Including medical sciences. 

I think Science is on a good path.

Thank you for the possibility to communicate my problems and recognitions. 

It helped at least me.

Thank you for your thoughts.

Sciences are! and should be united and rigoursly follow nature based evidences...

1/0=

It has an answer.

Science will have the answer.

I can just believe this. 

I have faith and trust in Science.

Science can be my Religion. 

Edited by Lasse
Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Lasse said:

Science can be my Religion. 

!

Moderator Note

We're done with this. If you've read 8 pages of people telling you why science doesn't equal religion and can still make this statement, it's clear you aren't listening, you're just preaching.

If you mention this in a mainstream science section, it will be off-topic and you will be suspended. Thread closed.

 
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • 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.