The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Why do you expect Science to know everything?  (Read 39408 times)

~CB

  • Guest
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #50 on: 23/04/2015 08:12:09 »
Quote from: Pete
Quote from: Jasper
Why do you expect Science to know everything?
I'm curious where you ever got this idea from? It's most certainly wrong.

Fascinating how two people can read the same thing and understand it differently.  I took it that Jasper was chiding those who seemed to expect science to know everything.

Here is your answer Mr. Peter;
By the way, I just got the book you referred me and it's pretty good for my level! Thanks for the reference again!
 

Offline PmbPhy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2762
  • Thanked: 38 times
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #51 on: 23/04/2015 09:09:03 »
Quote from: Pete
Quote from: Jasper
Why do you expect Science to know everything?
I'm curious where you ever got this idea from? It's most certainly wrong.

Fascinating how two people can read the same thing and understand it differently.  I took it that Jasper was chiding those who seemed to expect science to know everything.

Here is your answer Mr. Peter;
By the way, I just got the book you referred me and it's pretty good for my level! Thanks for the reference again!
What I originally asking was where you got the idea that scientists think that way. What I missed was that this was not what you had in mind but that its some of the forum members that think this way. Which forum were you referring to by the way? I.e. members from which forum?
 

~CB

  • Guest
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #52 on: 23/04/2015 09:41:16 »
I feel as if this post I'm about to make is right now very important on here as there are some members who have made it their objective to target what Science doesn't knows 'yet' to validate their own beliefs. I don't want the members this post is referring to, to get offended, rather understand what I'm about to say and start making actual difference.
Mr. Peter (Or would you prefer Dr.?), I wasn't really referring to all the members of a particular forum.
The members I was referring to included but was not limited to, 'The box'.
 

Offline PmbPhy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2762
  • Thanked: 38 times
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #53 on: 23/04/2015 11:46:36 »
Quote from: Jasper Hayden
Mr. Peter (Or would you prefer Dr.?),
Call me Pete. I don't have a PhD. I have the equivalent of an MS in Physics.
 

Offline jccc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 990
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #54 on: 23/04/2015 21:51:08 »
Except that the simplest answer is not always the right one.

We cannot observe space directly, but we can see that (on a cosmic scale) everything is moving away from everything else. An observer anywhere in the universe would look around themselves and claim that all of the distant galaxies are moving away from them (expanding universe, where the observer is at the center of expansion), and that the galaxies farthest away are moving fastest.

If it were just an issue of galaxies moving apart from one another you would see a progression like:

a...b.....c............d
a.....b.....c............d
a.......b.....c............d
a..........b.....c............d


But what we see is more like:
a...b.......c..............d
a.....b.........c................d
a.......b...........c..................d
a..........b.............c....................d

or more exaggerated:

a..b....c......d
a....b........c............d
a........b................c........................d
a................b................................c................................................d

Which indicates that the rate that objects move apart from one-another depends on how far away they are already. The easiest way to think about this is that the space between them is growing.

This also explains how objects can be moving apart from one-another faster than the speed of light. Since it is impossible (as far as we know) to accelerate an object to a speed greater than the speed of light, but not necessarily impossible (though we don't know how) for the space itself between objects to increase at any rate, making it appear as if the objects themselves are moving.

There are other explanations of these observations, but expanding space is the current favorite among most physicists and cosmologists.

I am content for the moment saying that the observations and theory are consistent, but I do wonder if there is a better explanation. Luckily there are people smarter than both of us working on it right now!

to me this is the single most valuable post i ever read in this/all forums. Thank You! captain bird.

i always doubt about big bang theory, your post was the key to the answer i need.

when i found the conflict of a...b......c.........d equal to d...c......b.........a        i was tired, trying to get some sleep.

just closed my eyes, the idea hits me like a dim flash, if gravity able to bend light path, able to slowdown light, why can't gravity accelerate incoming light?

i jumped up, looked at night sky and thanked God, then i came to post my find/idea. Ethos, this was my wow moment. will you paypal me 5?
 

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1277
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #55 on: 23/04/2015 22:47:05 »


i jumped up, looked at night sky and thanked God, then i came to post my find/idea. Ethos, this was my wow moment. will you paypal me 5?
Nope...................remember your buddy The Box's logic?

(2+3=5)
(5=1)
(1=0)

Maybe Mr. Box will agree to paypal you?
« Last Edit: 23/04/2015 23:01:29 by Ethos_ »
 

Offline jccc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 990
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #56 on: 24/04/2015 00:49:47 »
Thanks Ethos, i accept it as a quantum high 5!
 

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1918
  • Thanked: 123 times
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #57 on: 24/04/2015 11:46:26 »
Sometimes I feel 'TheBox' really is 'Jccc'. Wonder if that's really the case.

I've lifted this from the 'heat' thread because it is more appropriate here.

If we look at the posts by jccc and the box, we see some interesting differences.
Jccc has a consistent use of language, whereas box is almost bipolar, sometimes incoherent, other time very coherent.
Jccc has a poetic side I don't see in box, similarly a good sense of humour.
Although jccc can exhibit occasional, mild paranoia, this is much stronger in box.
Jccc posts mainly about the nature of the atom, nucleus, photon, particularly photon, where he views them quite differently to everyone else.
The box has a more general attack on the whole of science, and a very typical pattern of question response. He posts a question eg "does heat repel heat, folks reply assuming a level of understanding implied by the question, box then accuses them of not answering the question, because he knows what heat is. However, if he really knew what heat is, he wouldn't have had to ask the question in the first place. This behaviour could be indicative of a troll who is just having a laugh. Jccc doesn't show this type of behaviour.
I think there is a trait in box that is fascinated by what I call semantic paradoxes which involve conflicting definitions and usage of words, and I don't see this in jccc. I won't go through all the examples, but take one of his recent posts "technically the wind doesn't blow". By definition, the wind is an atmospheric movement of air, and blow (in this context) is movement of air. So the statement is a tautology.
I remember being fascinated by these when I was about 12. If a tree falls in a forest ....; don't read this notice; all lawyers are liars and I'm a lawyer; it's a long list. Some are interesting because they challenge the law of the excluded middle, or make you think about definitions, circular arguments and neurone loops. I also remember, about the same time, reading about the musings of Bishop Berkley and spending time walking around the house with my eyes closed, you don't need to bump into many tables before you realise the meaning of the word pragmatic. However, it does make you think about how our perceptions steer our view of (what I call) probably reality.
Arthur C Clark wrote a book in which one of the characters says "some jokes are always funny, some are funny only once". I would say that some things are interesting all the time, others like Sudoko and paradoxes, only once.
No I don't think jccc is the box. Too difficult for one person to keep up consistently. I find jccc good fun when he is not being annoying and disrupting serious posts, but the box often makes me wish I hadn't bothered to put fingers to keyboard, maybe I've finally learnt!.

PS hope you saw my reply #16 in the heat thread, not offended, just misunderstood!!


 

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1277
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #58 on: 24/04/2015 13:36:53 »
Sometimes I feel 'TheBox' really is 'Jccc'. Wonder if that's really the case.

I've lifted this from the 'heat' thread because it is more appropriate here.

If we look at the posts by jccc and the box, we see some interesting differences.
Jccc has a consistent use of language, whereas box is almost bipolar, sometimes incoherent, other time very coherent.
Jccc has a poetic side I don't see in box, similarly a good sense of humour.
Although jccc can exhibit occasional, mild paranoia, this is much stronger in box.
Jccc posts mainly about the nature of the atom, nucleus, photon, particularly photon, where he views them quite differently to everyone else.
The box has a more general attack on the whole of science, and a very typical pattern of question response. He posts a question eg "does heat repel heat, folks reply assuming a level of understanding implied by the question, box then accuses them of not answering the question, because he knows what heat is. However, if he really knew what heat is, he wouldn't have had to ask the question in the first place. This behaviour could be indicative of a troll who is just having a laugh. Jccc doesn't show this type of behaviour.
I think there is a trait in box that is fascinated by what I call semantic paradoxes which involve conflicting definitions and usage of words, and I don't see this in jccc. I won't go through all the examples, but take one of his recent posts "technically the wind doesn't blow". By definition, the wind is an atmospheric movement of air, and blow (in this context) is movement of air. So the statement is a tautology.
I remember being fascinated by these when I was about 12. If a tree falls in a forest ....; don't read this notice; all lawyers are liars and I'm a lawyer; it's a long list. Some are interesting because they challenge the law of the excluded middle, or make you think about definitions, circular arguments and neurone loops. I also remember, about the same time, reading about the musings of Bishop Berkley and spending time walking around the house with my eyes closed, you don't need to bump into many tables before you realise the meaning of the word pragmatic. However, it does make you think about how our perceptions steer our view of (what I call) probably reality.
Arthur C Clark wrote a book in which one of the characters says "some jokes are always funny, some are funny only once". I would say that some things are interesting all the time, others like Sudoko and paradoxes, only once.
No I don't think jccc is the box. Too difficult for one person to keep up consistently. I find jccc good fun when he is not being annoying and disrupting serious posts, but the box often makes me wish I hadn't bothered to put fingers to keyboard, maybe I've finally learnt!.

PS hope you saw my reply #16 in the heat thread, not offended, just misunderstood!!
I don't usually copy anyone's whole post out of respect for efficiency. However, because I reasoned that this last post by Colin is most intelligent and worthy, I made the exception. These points Colin has make are manifest examples for why Pete choose him to be one of our fine members at Pete's alternate forum.

My hats off to you Colin.......... A very fine example of critical thinking!
 

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1277
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #59 on: 25/04/2015 21:16:01 »
 

Offline jccc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 990
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #60 on: 26/04/2015 01:26:32 »
my theory to explain the expending space is there is no expansion at all.

to any observer, local star/gravitational field will accelerate incoming lights from all directions.

the closer star lights will blueshift the most due to stronger gravity, therefore, the farther away stars look like the more redshift. just like what we observed.

thoughts?

i am thinking the blueshift of the frequency of the incoming light is proportional to sun's mass/r^2 or something like that.

maybe the universe is still expanding, but at same rate. the observation result is the expending effect plus the local gravitational blueshift.

farther investigation and calculation are needed.

the size of the visible universe, the distance between stars, the origin and age of the universe, all need to be reconsider.

thoughts?
« Last Edit: 26/04/2015 02:43:46 by jccc »
 

Offline PmbPhy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2762
  • Thanked: 38 times
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #61 on: 26/04/2015 02:30:36 »
Quote from: Ethos_
I don't usually copy anyone's whole post out of respect for efficiency. However, because I reasoned that this last post by Colin is most intelligent and worthy, I made the exception. These points Colin has make are manifest examples for why Pete choose him to be one of our fine members at Pete's alternate forum.

My hats off to you Colin.......... A very fine example of critical thinking!
That's quite true. I also found that post to be excellent. I'm very happy he accepted my invitation to join my forum.
 

Offline jccc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 990
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #62 on: 27/04/2015 17:35:18 »
my theory to explain the expending space is there is no expansion at all.

to any observer, local star/gravitational field will accelerate incoming lights from all directions.

the closer star lights will blueshift the most due to stronger gravity, therefore, the farther away stars look like the more redshift. just like what we observed.

thoughts?

i am thinking the blueshift of the frequency of the incoming light is proportional to sun's mass/r^2 or something like that.

maybe the universe is still expanding, but at same rate. the observation result is the expending effect plus the local gravitational blueshift.

farther investigation and calculation are needed.

the size of the visible universe, the distance between stars, the origin and age of the universe, all need to be reconsider.

thoughts?

if we stand near by a black hole and look around, will we see/think the universe is expending much faster?

if we go deep space that is far far away any stars, we look around, is the universe still expending?

Bill, mind to share your thoughts?
 

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1277
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #63 on: 27/04/2015 19:00:28 »

bold head?
Butt head!

Ethos,

you and i are the 2 top critical thinkers, who else ever wowed?

agree?
With all due respect jccc, you and I are nothing alike.

Am I interested enough in the truth to investigate?.................Yes
Can I take good advice?..........Yes
Do I sincerely desire to learn?.................Yes
When I'm wrong, can I admit my errors and profit from that fact?.......Yes
When faced with new information, can I change my mind?...........Yes

Mr. jccc, you have proven beyond any shadow of doubt that you should 'honestly' answer each of these questions in the negative.

Is jccc interested enough in the truth to investigate?................No
Can jccc take good advice?............No
Does jccc sincerely desire to learn?.......No
When jccc is wrong, can he admit his errors and profit from that fact?....No
When jccc is faced with new information, can he change his mind?........No

Mr. jccc, you and I are nothing alike!!
« Last Edit: 27/04/2015 19:03:35 by Ethos_ »
 

Offline jccc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 990
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #64 on: 27/04/2015 20:20:09 »
opinion various, bet you pretty soon we'll all become bold head.

really enjoy your comment!
 

Offline PmbPhy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2762
  • Thanked: 38 times
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #65 on: 27/04/2015 23:26:22 »
Quote from: jccc
really enjoy your comment!
Good. Because it was correct.
 

Offline jccc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 990
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #66 on: 28/04/2015 01:22:55 »
Pete,

is my no bang theory correct?

why?
 

Offline PmbPhy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2762
  • Thanked: 38 times
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #67 on: 28/04/2015 01:44:43 »
Pete,

is my no bang theory correct?

why?
No. There is no reason to assume that the Bang Theory is wrong. It most certainly hasn't been "debunked." All observations made so far are consistent with the theory of the Big Bang. Don't forget that science uses inductive logic and not deductive logic. Otherwise you'll start whining that just because you've found a theory that fits the facts it doesn't mean that the theory is correct. Yes. All physicists know that simple fact. But the more we test a theory and the results of the experiment is in accordance with theory the more faith we have in the theory. That's what science is all about.
 

Offline jccc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 990
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #68 on: 28/04/2015 05:20:23 »
Pete, this is the only comment from another forum, how do you think?

 jcc said: ↑
my theory to explain the expending space is there is no expansion at all.

to any observer, local star/gravitational field will accelerate incoming lights from all directions.

the closer star lights will blueshift the most due to stronger gravity, therefore, the farther away stars look like the more redshift. just like what we observed.

thoughts?


So, they are red shifted mainly because the light has had more time to fall, and from a greater distance? And you would explain the blue shift of the Andromeda galaxy in this model because you believe it is the closest galaxy to the Milky Way? Not so. The Canis cluster galaxy is closer, and it is red shifted because evidently it is not headed in our direction.

See:
http://www.universetoday.com/21914/the-closest-galaxy-to-the-milky-way/

Stars in our own galaxy are red shifted. This has been used for ranging, determining a general shape and identifying various spiral arm structures in the Milky Way.

Nothing made of matter or energy travels faster than light. Light may bend or Doppler shift when the observer is moving either toward or away from the source, and this is generally a much larger effect on Doppler shift than any caused by proximity to or by light propagating into proximity of gravitating objects.

More recently, multiple gravitationally lensed images of a distant supernovae have been observed going off at intervals marked in terms of decades of light travel time, so one hardly need consider Doppler shifts to determine your idea to eliminate the Big Bang doesn't make much sense. That doesn't necessarily invalidate your conclusion. Informed skepticism is usually good for science, so keep trying.
 

Offline PmbPhy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2762
  • Thanked: 38 times
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #69 on: 28/04/2015 05:37:45 »
Quote from: jccc
Pete, this is the only comment from another forum, how do you think?
The proper way to ask that question is What do you think? not "how" do you think.

Do you know what an axiom is? Its the same thing as a principle. Look those terms up and then look up the phrase Cosmological Principle and then apply this to your idea and see what you end up with.

A great deal of the time when you post all these speculations that you come with you seem to ignore almost everything else in physics. In this case you're ignoring the principle that the Big Bang theory is based on, i.e. the cosmological principle.

Let me know what you find when you look it up and study it.
« Last Edit: 28/04/2015 05:40:47 by PmbPhy »
 

~CB

  • Guest
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #70 on: 28/04/2015 07:34:54 »
I don't really think he is going to study it. Rather, he will just attack you back with poorly formed phrases ignoring your questions regarding, if he has studied it.
It's not his mistake, you see. Noticing how he types I really feel as if he needs to first learn to read and write English before anything else. Maybe he wants to study the link you mentioned above... maybe he simply can't;
Whatever the case, if you are trying to teach/argue (with) him... I would really prefer not to. I believe you all have much, much better things to do. I really hope none of you brilliant minds get tempted to correct his feeble beliefs out of rage or whatever reason you might have.

Peter, thanks for making the forum public!
 

Offline PmbPhy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2762
  • Thanked: 38 times
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #71 on: 28/04/2015 07:41:10 »
Quote from: Jasper Hayden
I don't really think he is going to study it. Rather, he will just attack you back with poorly formed phrases ignoring your questions regarding, if he has studied it.
It's not his mistake, you see. Noticing how he types I really feel as if he needs to first learn to read and write English before anything else. Maybe he wants to study the link you mentioned above... maybe he simply can't;
Whatever the case, if you are trying to teach/argue (with) him... I would really prefer not to.
If you're suggesting that I do your will then that's not going to happen.

Quote from: Jasper Hayden
I believe you all have much, much better things to do. I really hope none of you brilliant minds get tempted to correct his feeble beliefs out of rage or whatever reason you might have.
I only respond to crackpots when I'm bored.

Quote from: Jasper Hayden
Peter, thanks for making the forum public!
What forum are you talking about? You said "the" forum. What is "the" forum you're referring to and why would you think that I'd know what you were referring to?
 

~CB

  • Guest
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #72 on: 28/04/2015 07:50:29 »
I thought it was pretty obvious. Anyways, I was talking about the NewEnglandPhysics forum. I really wanted to join it,so... thanks!
 

~CB

  • Guest
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #73 on: 28/04/2015 07:56:21 »
I'm not suggesting that you do my will. I just thought that it would be in everyone's best interest to ignore Jccc.
But, since now it's pretty clear that you like to pass your time trying to convince about how wrong he is... I will stop with my blabbering.
 

Offline PmbPhy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2762
  • Thanked: 38 times
    • View Profile
Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #74 on: 28/04/2015 08:21:59 »
Quote from: Jasper Hayden
I thought it was pretty obvious. Anyways, I was talking about the NewEnglandPhysics forum. I really wanted to join it,so... thanks!
No. It wasn't obvious at all. Why would you think that it was.

Also, I don't understand what are you thanking me for? Please clarify.

I don't recall sending you an invitation to join and membership is by invitation only. I need to know you a lot better than I do now before I invite you to join.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: Why do you expect Science to know everything?
« Reply #74 on: 28/04/2015 08:21:59 »

 

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