Dammit! I became an Atheist too soon!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-12-2011, 11:24 AM
RE: Dammit! I became an Atheist too soon!
(16-12-2011 10:20 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(16-12-2011 08:32 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(16-12-2011 07:09 AM)Chas Wrote:  F=ma is just a mathematical model; it doesn't describe or explain what force and mass are. It just describes the observed behavior.
No difference.

Well, there's 4 units in that mathematical model. Force. Equivalence. Mass. Acceleration.

Now, you do that to your string theory, mr. no difference. Big Grin

It sounds like you are arguing that simpler models are somehow more 'real'.
Well, I'd say simpler models are usual just less accurate.

Newtonian mechanics is not as accurate as relativity, but it's simpler and good enough for daily use.

It sounds like you neck wrote a check your mathematical model cannot cash, mr. no difference. Big Grin

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-12-2011, 06:48 AM
RE: Dammit! I became an Atheist too soon!
(16-12-2011 06:39 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(15-12-2011 10:15 PM)DeepThought Wrote:  String theory ... looks like a jumble of equations that allow you wiggle room to fit in everything that is observed.

But that's precisely what physics is. Scientists make models that fit the observations.

The trouble with string theory is the countless variations that ALL fit the current observations. You can call them a theory and make some predictions only within what we already know. It really is a jumble of equations with wiggle room.

To me string theory looks like a mess.

It is possible to have a geocentric perspective of earth where you have a complex set of equations that exactly trace the planets orbits by placing earth at the centre. The equations would be incredibly complex when compared to simple equations having eliptical orbits around the sun.

Both models could give the same answer except geocentric version is more complex.

To me string theory looks like the geocentric theory back in the day. Convoluted and overcomplicated. Have you seen the stuff astronomers did back in the day to predict orbits putting earth at the centre? Those complex models they built... Both could theoretically work. One of them is just easier to apply by changing your perspective.

Whenever new data comes in the string theorists tweak their model a bit more. I feel like we have the wool pulled over our eyes and the real answer is more elegant than that convoluted mess.

“Forget Jesus, the stars died so you could be born.” - Lawrence M. Krauss
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DeepThought's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: