Concerning Physical Science

[Master Lawbringer]

CMPML, Department of System Failure!

1. All knowledge is ultimately circular. Break any idea down long enough and you'll end up with ideas, like 'time', for which all definitions end up circular.

Specifically concerning numbers : You can't escape the fact that trying to define what a number actually is begins and ends with the pragmatic observation that we, and other machines, are able to count. Logic and set theory, themselves based on self-evident, circular, concepts (try to define 'set') are circularly dependent on each other and even if you reduce everything to just manipulations of symbols you'll just end up with a machine that can count and perform calculations.

You can't escape the self-evident and circular nature of the fundamental ideas.

2. You can't define randomness because actually defining it ceases to make it truly random. Randomness appears when you can't measure any further. This means that measurement, and the knowledge coming from it, stops. The scientific method just stops there.
Bell's Theorem is just a strange and backwards way of saying : Pure chance cannot be defined.

3. All mathematical theories of physics end up plagued by logical trivialism and there is no experimental support for new physics beyond the standard model that they hope could solve those problems. Physics is pushed further and further into untestability and pipe dreams like String Theory. And the longer this process lasts, and it has already lasted for over a generation, the more likely it becomes that no further revolution(s) in that area are to be expected.

In fact, it's better to notice that the themes of unmeasurability, randomness, logical trivialism and the inability to perform further experiments all imply the absence of further knowledge.

4. And when they venture into metaphysical speculation like many worlds, multiverse or simulation theory they end up on the same playing field as the traditional religions. You get no points for making a metaphysical theory just 'sciency' sounding, it's after all the evidence that counts. But seeing as they end up on the same playing field as religion, those traditional religions all of a sudden have more evidence going for them. After all, a religion _is_ a remarkable event and just that, and other remarkable things about them, is more evidence than just zero for many worlds, multiverse or simulation theory with the last mimicking traditional religion so closely that it's just silly.

You should notice that those sciency religions are very close to 'anything goes', to logical trivialism.

Here endeth the lesson.

End of Document.