Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
quantumdream

Could physics be a conspiracy?

Recommended Posts

Perhaps there are no great truths or theories, just a world that dispenses information consistant with our eventual expectations...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One day I was thinking: science as we know it could be totally wrong. Perhaps there are no atoms, black holes, quarks or matter. Science in general is how we interpret things, not necessarily how they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Science is about ovservation and documentation..... where would you stipulate the conspiracies come in??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by blike

One day I was thinking: science as we know it could be totally wrong. Perhaps there are no atoms, black holes, quarks or matter. Science in general is how we interpret things, not necessarily how they are.

 

It could be yes. In fact, it probably is, in a sense. remember all we have is a mathematical model, that predicts what we will observe, based on a bunch of 'interactions'. All it is, is just some mathematical explanation of what we see. An analogy would be making a mathematical model of a car, based on what we do to the car, and what we observe, without ever being able to look under the bonnet. It would produce the right result, and we could say 'hey, now we understand this car' but in reality we don't.

 

This becomes particularly acuse when we look at the likes of Quantum mechanics, where so far as I can see, we have to resort to using imaginary numbers in order to get a result... well what are they?

 

for those of you who know, skip this bit, or correct it if I'm wrong:

the imaginary number i is basically the square root of minus one. while it may seem useless, as it isn't a 'thing that exists' - for example you can't have i apples, it is a tremendously useful tool in mathemetics.

 

well i isn't 'real', but it is nescessary, so wither we have a flawed understanding of 'i' or our model is nothing more than that, just a mathematical construct, that by fair means or foul, comes up with the right answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Billzilla

Define 'reality'.

 

very profound, and philosophers have been arguing over it for thousands of years.

 

the only reply I can give, is that an objective reality is 'that which is', wheras a subjective reality is 'that which we think is'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
to look under the bonnet

 

Are you british? :)

 

 

i is a very good example, glad you thought of it. got me thinking even more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct RadE, reality is the way it is and we had better get it right, thats what science's goal is.

 

We can not define what real is, it is already defined, we must search for the concepts, by logic and trial an error so we can find that definition.

 

Pseudoscience becoming true science is the process.

 

And you are talking to the chief pseudoscientist in these parts!

:)

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Conspiracy~"to breathe with."

 

Quantum participation does just that. The world affects us as we affect the world. "Quantum thinking," as opposed to thinking with aloof classical reason, is in sync with environmental expectation. It answers in an unconventional manner, but one that intimates a more inclusive objectivity. Perhaps there is even a Higher Intelligence that influences our expectations with outcomes.

 

Moreover, the scientific method is not always the most effective; rather than rigidly changing our expectations, "eventual expectations" may also interpolate toward a conclusion. Recall the unconventional methods of Ramanujan, removed from the scientific method, reproducing much of modern mathematics in a his mystical fashion, deriving problems and corollaries solely from solutions themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By definition a conspiracy is, "an agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act"-Webster's-. ....... subversive acts, such as a crime, require one thing.....a motive.....what is the motive you are suggesting here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't be surprised if a couple hundred years down the line all our laws of physics are thrown out the window. We simply don't know all too much about the universe, especially on sub-atomic scales (and btw, we can look at an atom)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Motive - to show a correlation between physical phenomena and intuition ("eventual expectations") internal historically to observers (and manifest to a degree greater than that provided by the scientific method).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by blike

 

Are you british? :)

 

 

i is a very good example, glad you thought of it. got me thinking even more.

 

Ineed I am.. ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and btw, we can look at an atom

 

atom-cesium-atoms.jpg

 

"STM image (7 nm x 7 nm) of a single zigzag chain of cesium atoms (red) on a gallium-arsenside surface (blue)"

 

The point I was making that although we observe atoms, its only our observation..not necessarily the right observation or the only observation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We all have a different phase relative to the actual atoms, which does not affect their dual (me-atom) expectation value, but does that of the triadic path you-me-atom. Much like a dual slit experiment with communicating observers for slits, and a laboratory>>lambda source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Zarkov

We can not define what real is

 

Woah, I know kung-foo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Real is what is supported by the most evidence at the moment.

The way science works, real can go in all sorts of directions until further investigation narrows the possibilities. For example:

The Ice Man. At first discovery he was treated as a recent casualty. Then observers noted the ancient clothing and weapons. Now he was an old hunter. After measurements showed he was 5000 years old and had his copper axe and bow it was persued that he was a high sacrifice. Grains and grasses in his stomach had some postulating that he was a vegetarian. Later an arrow in his left shoulder had some saying he was chased out of his villiage.

The latest says through DNA tests on his stomach contents that he had a meal of Ibyx or wild goat and later a meal of vennison or deer meat. This suggests that he was a good hunter. Hunters shoot for near the left shoulder blade for quick kills so he may have been killed by a different tribes hunter. This is a long ways from the starting presumption of a frozen recent wanderer.

Real just gets more real with information.

Just aman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • 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.