The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?  (Read 15661 times)

Offline Farsight

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 396
    • View Profile
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #25 on: 09/12/2009 18:20:28 »
But this says nothing about the nuclear forces really being electromagnetism. It doesn't address any of the ways that we actually measure the nuclear forces. Again you go to some sources that has nothing to do with the science involved because you know nothing about the science involved.
I know plenty about the science involved, and I give sources and a rationale. All you give is abuse.

You could say that everything is electroweak. Do you know the difference between electroweak interactions and electromagnetic interactions? Do you know why they have different names?
Yes. But that's a red herring. There's no escaping that after proton-antiproton annihilation, what we're left with is not quarks and gluons. All trace of your concept of strong force has gone. What we're left with, is photons. So you owe Vern an apology. Now stop spoiling the discussions and make a reasoned contribution instead.
 

Offline Farsight

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 396
    • View Profile
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #26 on: 09/12/2009 18:23:49 »
It's not absolute fantasy.. I agree with the photon charge in a bent geodesic - but i find it hard to agree with vern with everything he conjectures - just as much as i expect people to find many things i say - so what does that tell us??
That we should discuss physics, and attempt to improve our understanding by sharing opinion, information, and evidence.   

I believe that we are missing lot in this universe. we are missing basics in physics still hiding. HOW on earth without knowing the every corner of this universe. just predicting with math ?? this is the foolish thing I have every seen..!! Math is fooling Physics. Geometry is OK but not other areas of math.
I share your sentiment to some degree. Mathematics is a vital tool for physics, but it is not a science. Many "theoretical physicists" are effectively mathematicians rather than scientists, they pay lip service to the scientific method, and they respond with dismissive and aggressive hostility to the scientific evidence that challenges their assertions and their current dominance.
« Last Edit: 09/12/2009 18:38:23 by Farsight »
 

Offline PhysBang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #27 on: 09/12/2009 21:15:39 »
But this says nothing about the nuclear forces really being electromagnetism. It doesn't address any of the ways that we actually measure the nuclear forces. Again you go to some sources that has nothing to do with the science involved because you know nothing about the science involved.
I know plenty about the science involved, and I give sources and a rationale. All you give is abuse.
You get "abuse" because you simply do not give either evidence or rationale. You merely claim, over and over, to give these things. Whenever anyone points out that you have not given evidence or rationale, you call this "abuse".
Quote
You could say that everything is electroweak. Do you know the difference between electroweak interactions and electromagnetic interactions? Do you know why they have different names?
Yes. But that's a red herring. There's no escaping that after proton-antiproton annihilation, what we're left with is not quarks and gluons. All trace of your concept of strong force has gone. What we're left with, is photons. So you owe Vern an apology. Now stop spoiling the discussions and make a reasoned contribution instead.
You always say that the facts are a red herring. For once, it would be nice to see you actually address the way that systems actually work and the actual predictions associated with the different forces that you discuss. But, as usual, you dodge any question about the specifics that physicists care about.
 

Offline PhysBang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #28 on: 09/12/2009 21:17:19 »
I share your sentiment to some degree. Mathematics is a vital tool for physics, but it is not a science. Many "theoretical physicists" are effectively mathematicians rather than scientists, they pay lip service to the scientific method, and they respond with dismissive and aggressive hostility to the scientific evidence that challenges their assertions and their current dominance.
You have never, ever presented any evidence in favour of your position. Physics is a heavily mathematical discipline and you have repeatedly admitted that you cannot do the mathematics. Therefore you lack the ability to actually assess the relevant evidence.
 

Offline Farsight

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 396
    • View Profile
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #29 on: 10/12/2009 08:35:23 »
Here's the evidence: http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=27075.msg288980#msg288980. Where's yours? I haven't "repeatedly admitted that I can't do the mathematics". I've repeatedly refused to allow mathematics be used to dismiss scientific evidence. That's what you do, repeatedly, and you've done it yet again. Please respond to this evidence instead of putting up a smokescreen of outrage and abuse and retreating behind a mathematics that does not adequately describe annihilation. 
 

Offline peppercorn

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1466
    • View Profile
    • solar
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #30 on: 10/12/2009 11:40:07 »
Here's the evidence: http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=27075.msg288980#msg288980. Where's yours? I haven't "repeatedly admitted that I can't do the mathematics".
Interesting ideas, but without maths how can you make predictions that can be tested against real-world observations?
 

Offline PhysBang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #31 on: 10/12/2009 14:18:12 »
Interesting ideas, but without maths how can you make predictions that can be tested against real-world observations?
Exactly. The entire history of physics from Galileo is one of accurate description through mathematics. The reason why people believe certain physical theories over others is because of how well they match the mathematical details of our observations. Farsight ignores about four centuries of evidence by refusing to do any mathematics and refusing to look at any measurements. By refusing to do any mathematics whatsoever, he is providing absolutely no evidence for his theories.
 

Offline Farsight

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 396
    • View Profile
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #32 on: 11/12/2009 15:30:13 »
Interesting ideas, but without maths how can you make predictions that can be tested against real-world observations?
By understanding the fundamentals. For example you consider the proton to be a trefoil configuration, then you look at a table of knots and predict a stable pentaquark. But note that I'm not saying we shouldn't use maths at all. You'd want to put some rigor into your prediction and say what the mass is going to be. It's a question of getting the balance right, and not allowing mathematics to obscure the scientific evidence that's there.

Get it wrong and the result can be speculative hypotheses that remain unsupported for decades, along with a hostility to any scientific evidence that poses a threat to those hypotheses. In physics today that seems to be where some are, hence New Scientist repeats the adage string theory is the only game in town. Hence papers like http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0512265 are "studiously ignored" despite the mathematical content. Hence we see dishonest abuse that is intended only to discredit, and distract from the fact that scientific evidence has been dismissed and no counter-evidence offered. 

 

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #33 on: 11/12/2009 15:41:15 »
Farsight

Just a few words to the potentially-wise.

Physics was earliest-based on the vigour of mathematics. Without it, physics would be a ghost, shadowing absolutely nothing but conjecture and not of any directional importance.
 

Offline Farsight

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 396
    • View Profile
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #34 on: 11/12/2009 16:09:03 »
We need mathematics, Mr Scientist. It's like water. Water is good for you, but drink too much and you die. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_intoxication
 

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #35 on: 11/12/2009 16:11:31 »
In moderation, which gives us as a human being-like race the ability to know when to stop.
 

Offline PhysBang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #36 on: 11/12/2009 20:31:12 »
We need mathematics, Mr Scientist. It's like water. Water is good for you, but drink too much and you die. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_intoxication
Drink absolutely none, and one gets into problems as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehydration

It can lead to the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delirium
 

Offline Ron Hughes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 363
    • View Profile
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #37 on: 11/12/2009 22:25:35 »
No one suggested drinking none. Your response was a joke?
 

Offline PhysBang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #38 on: 11/12/2009 23:13:09 »
No one suggested drinking none. Your response was a joke?
Farsight does actually suggest drinking none, metaphorically. Even when he claims that the "correct" interpretation of general relativity will get rid of the need to posit dark matter, he refuses to actually address the related mathematics. And make no mistake: all the evidence about dark matter relates to very specific measurements, so any theory that seeks to get rid of dark matter has to show why we get the measurements and predictions that we do--a mathematical claim. To make such a claim and refuse to back it up with the mathematics is to enter the realm of either lies or the realm of delusion.
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #39 on: 12/12/2009 04:38:38 »
No one suggested drinking none. Your response was a joke?
Farsight does actually suggest drinking none, metaphorically. Even when he claims that the "correct" interpretation of general relativity will get rid of the need to posit dark matter, he refuses to actually address the related mathematics. And make no mistake: all the evidence about dark matter relates to very specific measurements, so any theory that seeks to get rid of dark matter has to show why we get the measurements and predictions that we do--a mathematical claim. To make such a claim and refuse to back it up with the mathematics is to enter the realm of either lies or the realm of delusion.
At the risk of dragging a large and rather smelly red herring into the room, there is no denying (at least I'm not about to) the scientific observations and the mathematical analysis that points to the existence of a lot of matter that we cannot observe. However, I don't think that necessarily proves that such matter actually exists. It's a reasonable bet that it does, but there could be other explanations.

Math can only prove that a model is valid. It does not immediately exclude other models. However, those models will also have to be supported by math.
 

Offline peppercorn

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1466
    • View Profile
    • solar
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #40 on: 12/12/2009 12:39:58 »
Math can only prove that a model is valid. It does not immediately exclude other models. However, those models will also have to be supported by math.
Here, here Geezer! (off-topic: ever wondered why the Brits truncate mathematics to maths and not math?)

We need mathematics, Mr Scientist. It's like water. Water is good for you, but drink too much and you die.
I'd love to see the headline "Man dies of maths poisoning"!
 

Offline Farsight

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 396
    • View Profile
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #41 on: 13/12/2009 00:15:21 »
Farsight does actually suggest drinking none, metaphorically.
No I don't, I've made that quite clear.

Even when he claims that the "correct" interpretation of general relativity will get rid of the need to posit dark matter, he refuses to actually address the related mathematics.
I refuse to be distracted by a deliberate red herring. What's important is the scientific evidence, and it's you refusing to address it, not me. You're using mathematics as a smokescreen, and you still offer no evidence to counter the evidence I provided earlier. 

And make no mistake: all the evidence about dark matter relates to very specific measurements, so any theory that seeks to get rid of dark matter has to show why we get the measurements and predictions that we do--a mathematical claim. To make such a claim and refuse to back it up with the mathematics is to enter the realm of either lies or the realm of delusion.
There is no "evidence" for dark matter. We observe gravitational anomalies. Dark matter is just one hypothesis that attempts to explain them, along with MOND and STVG and TeVeS. And there is no delusion in inhomogeneous space. That's what Einstein said a gravitational field is. That's general relativity:

"According to this theory the metrical qualities of the continuum of space-time differ in the environment of different points of space-time, and are partly conditioned by the matter existing outside of the territory under consideration. This space-time variability of the reciprocal relations of the standards of space and time, or, perhaps, the recognition of the fact that “empty space” in its physical relation is neither homogeneous nor isotropic.."

And since the universe expands whilst galaxies are gravitationally bound, the result has to be a shell of inhomogeneous space around every galaxy. It explains why dark matter has remained undetected since 1933. You merely hide behind mathematics because you know you have no defence against this simple logic. I use scientific evidence to make the world of physics comprehensible. And as you've amply demonstrated, you hide behind mathematics because you can't face up to the scientific evidence, and because you want to keep the world of physics incomprehensible.   
 

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #42 on: 13/12/2009 00:22:56 »
Farsight - no wonder people loose patience with you. I'm starting to feel it too. Enough of these sporadic attempts to mislead on your own whims. I'm sure if any scientist here read your posts would agree to great certainty.
 

Offline Farsight

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 396
    • View Profile
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #43 on: 13/12/2009 01:05:19 »
I'm not misleading anybody, Mr Scientist. I give the scientific evidence, the references to general relativity, and the simple logic - none of which is countered by similar evidence/reference/logic. So I think people will be able to work out for themselves who's trying to mislead people, don't you?
 

Offline PhysBang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #44 on: 13/12/2009 01:27:41 »
Even when he claims that the "correct" interpretation of general relativity will get rid of the need to posit dark matter, he refuses to actually address the related mathematics.
I refuse to be distracted by a deliberate red herring. What's important is the scientific evidence, and it's you refusing to address it, not me. You're using mathematics as a smokescreen, and you still offer no evidence to counter the evidence I provided earlier. 
The scientific evidence is in the form of actual measurements of rotation curves and actual predictions of rotation curves, plus actual measurements and predictions of gravitational lensing, plus actual measurements and predictions of background radiation fluctuations, plus actual measurements and predictions of galaxy clustering profiles. You claim that all of this can be done away with with a correct interpretation of relativity theory. so let's see you take on even one example from this collection of scientific evidence. You will not because you cannot.
Quote
And make no mistake: all the evidence about dark matter relates to very specific measurements, so any theory that seeks to get rid of dark matter has to show why we get the measurements and predictions that we do--a mathematical claim. To make such a claim and refuse to back it up with the mathematics is to enter the realm of either lies or the realm of delusion.
There is no "evidence" for dark matter. We observe gravitational anomalies. Dark matter is just one hypothesis that attempts to explain them, along with MOND and STVG and TeVeS.
And most scientists believe dark matter and not MOND and not STVG and not TeVes because of how these theories actually deal with the various predictions. You have never, ever addressed how any of these theories deal with the available measurements. You have been challenged to show how "inhomogeneous space" makes any difference to the prediction of a rotation curve of a galaxy or any of the other evidence for dark matter. You always cravenly back away from this challenge with some whinge or another.
Quote
And there is no delusion in inhomogeneous space. That's what Einstein said a gravitational field is. That's general relativity:

"According to this theory the metrical qualities of the continuum of space-time differ in the environment of different points of space-time, and are partly conditioned by the matter existing outside of the territory under consideration. This space-time variability of the reciprocal relations of the standards of space and time, or, perhaps, the recognition of the fact that “empty space” in its physical relation is neither homogeneous nor isotropic.."
I note that you do not finish this quotation. Like always, you cherry-pick. (In this case, anyone who searches for the passage you cited can see your specific cherry-picking.) If you finished the quotation, it would show that what Einstein was discussing was a specific mathematical claim about physics. It is this claim that you cannot understand, otherwise you would use the gravitational potentials Einstein discusses to prove your claim about dark matter.
Quote
And since the universe expands whilst galaxies are gravitationally bound, the result has to be a shell of inhomogeneous space around every galaxy. It explains why dark matter has remained undetected since 1933. You merely hide behind mathematics because you know you have no defence against this simple logic.
There is nothing logical in what you have written. Please demonstrate, using Einstein's theory, that an expanding universe leaves "a shell of inhomogeneous space around every galaxy" that results in the anomalous rotation curves that we observe. Your demonstration must include a specific prediction of what these rotation curves should be.
Quote
I use scientific evidence to make the world of physics comprehensible. And as you've amply demonstrated, you hide behind mathematics because you can't face up to the scientific evidence, and because you want to keep the world of physics incomprehensible.   
Physics is not incomprehensible. The stuff you write is incomprehensible, but only by virtue of the fact that there is nothing there to comprehend.
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #45 on: 13/12/2009 02:04:14 »
We seem to have drifted off topic, and some of these posts are becoming rather personal.
« Last Edit: 13/12/2009 03:08:54 by Geezer »
 

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #46 on: 13/12/2009 07:12:33 »
Even when he claims that the "correct" interpretation of general relativity will get rid of the need to posit dark matter, he refuses to actually address the related mathematics.
I refuse to be distracted by a deliberate red herring. What's important is the scientific evidence, and it's you refusing to address it, not me. You're using mathematics as a smokescreen, and you still offer no evidence to counter the evidence I provided earlier. 
The scientific evidence is in the form of actual measurements of rotation curves and actual predictions of rotation curves, plus actual measurements and predictions of gravitational lensing, plus actual measurements and predictions of background radiation fluctuations, plus actual measurements and predictions of galaxy clustering profiles. You claim that all of this can be done away with with a correct interpretation of relativity theory. so let's see you take on even one example from this collection of scientific evidence. You will not because you cannot.
Quote
And make no mistake: all the evidence about dark matter relates to very specific measurements, so any theory that seeks to get rid of dark matter has to show why we get the measurements and predictions that we do--a mathematical claim. To make such a claim and refuse to back it up with the mathematics is to enter the realm of either lies or the realm of delusion.
There is no "evidence" for dark matter. We observe gravitational anomalies. Dark matter is just one hypothesis that attempts to explain them, along with MOND and STVG and TeVeS.
And most scientists believe dark matter and not MOND and not STVG and not TeVes because of how these theories actually deal with the various predictions. You have never, ever addressed how any of these theories deal with the available measurements. You have been challenged to show how "inhomogeneous space" makes any difference to the prediction of a rotation curve of a galaxy or any of the other evidence for dark matter. You always cravenly back away from this challenge with some whinge or another.
Quote
And there is no delusion in inhomogeneous space. That's what Einstein said a gravitational field is. That's general relativity:

"According to this theory the metrical qualities of the continuum of space-time differ in the environment of different points of space-time, and are partly conditioned by the matter existing outside of the territory under consideration. This space-time variability of the reciprocal relations of the standards of space and time, or, perhaps, the recognition of the fact that “empty space” in its physical relation is neither homogeneous nor isotropic.."
I note that you do not finish this quotation. Like always, you cherry-pick. (In this case, anyone who searches for the passage you cited can see your specific cherry-picking.) If you finished the quotation, it would show that what Einstein was discussing was a specific mathematical claim about physics. It is this claim that you cannot understand, otherwise you would use the gravitational potentials Einstein discusses to prove your claim about dark matter.
Quote
And since the universe expands whilst galaxies are gravitationally bound, the result has to be a shell of inhomogeneous space around every galaxy. It explains why dark matter has remained undetected since 1933. You merely hide behind mathematics because you know you have no defence against this simple logic.
There is nothing logical in what you have written. Please demonstrate, using Einstein's theory, that an expanding universe leaves "a shell of inhomogeneous space around every galaxy" that results in the anomalous rotation curves that we observe. Your demonstration must include a specific prediction of what these rotation curves should be.
Quote
I use scientific evidence to make the world of physics comprehensible. And as you've amply demonstrated, you hide behind mathematics because you can't face up to the scientific evidence, and because you want to keep the world of physics incomprehensible.   
Physics is not incomprehensible. The stuff you write is incomprehensible, but only by virtue of the fact that there is nothing there to comprehend.

You're not much better either physbang. Two people fighting each other, and niether can live up to their own convictions.
 

Offline JimBob

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6564
  • Thanked: 7 times
  • Moderator
    • View Profile
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #47 on: 15/12/2009 14:46:35 »
THIS WHOLE DISCUSSION IS NOT ACCEPTABLE!

Using personal insults or attacks in this forum - ANYWHERE in this forum - will not be tolerated. Any further inflammatory remarks will result in an immediate and permanent BAN on the poster of such a ban. Some of the above persons discussing this thread have been warned before on other forums, then banned on these for continued discourtesy in these other forums. It has happened before. It WILL happen here if one more insult is hurled.

This forum has an acceptable use policy all agreed to when registering that will result in the actions being taken.

For those who will bother, the Acceptable Use Policy for this Forum can be found at

http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=8535.0

JimBob - Moderator
 

Offline Butterworthd

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #48 on: 15/12/2009 15:33:28 »
I'm afraid that truth will only be discovered after everything else has been proven wrong.  In other words I don't think we want to know the truth.
 

Offline Farsight

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 396
    • View Profile
Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #49 on: 15/12/2009 23:59:15 »
I think we do, butterworld. That's why people contribute to these discussion forums, because we have this burning desire to find that truth, using anything we can to home in closer to it. It isn't easy, these things take time, but I really do think the internet is making thinks comprehensible. By the way, I thought this was an interesting article:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20427381.100-stephen-wolfram-im-an-information-pack-rat.html
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Is the world of physics now incomprehensible?
« Reply #49 on: 15/12/2009 23:59:15 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums