While I was on my way to the Philosophy forum.....
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-05-2013, 12:28 AM
RE: While I was on my way to the Philosophy forum.....
(22-05-2013 12:23 AM)I and I Wrote:  
(21-05-2013 11:40 PM)Adenosis Wrote:  Yes I said you appear to be against modern science because your interpretation of it is an orgy of mathematics. So perhaps not science in general but modern physics is your problem. When an atheist compares something to religion I take it they aren't awfully fond of it.

Religion and science share a major component. One believes that All things are knowable and we can know them now if we trust god, and one believes that all things will eventually be and can be knowable. Both are different but share the completely ludicrous idea that it is possible to know all things. Philosophy would ask obvious questions like: how can one ever test to see if they know more than previous people's? How can one determine if knowledge is on any kind of historical trajectory at all?

I'd like to know where you got this idea that science claims everything is knowable.

2.5 billion seconds total
1.67 billion seconds conscious

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-05-2013, 12:59 AM
RE: While I was on my way to the Philosophy forum.....
(22-05-2013 12:28 AM)Adenosis Wrote:  
(22-05-2013 12:23 AM)I and I Wrote:  Religion and science share a major component. One believes that All things are knowable and we can know them now if we trust god, and one believes that all things will eventually be and can be knowable. Both are different but share the completely ludicrous idea that it is possible to know all things. Philosophy would ask obvious questions like: how can one ever test to see if they know more than previous people's? How can one determine if knowledge is on any kind of historical trajectory at all?

I'd like to know where you got this idea that science claims everything is knowable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_everything
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-05-2013, 03:26 AM
RE: While I was on my way to the Philosophy forum.....
(22-05-2013 12:59 AM)I and I Wrote:  
(22-05-2013 12:28 AM)Adenosis Wrote:  I'd like to know where you got this idea that science claims everything is knowable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_everything

I do not understand the 'Theory of Everything' to be a theory of literally everything. It is not a theory of consciousness and the nature of our subjective experience.

2.5 billion seconds total
1.67 billion seconds conscious

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-05-2013, 03:40 AM
RE: While I was on my way to the Philosophy forum.....
(22-05-2013 03:26 AM)Adenosis Wrote:  
(22-05-2013 12:59 AM)I and I Wrote:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_everything

I do not understand the 'Theory of Everything' to be a theory of literally everything. It is not a theory of consciousness and the nature of our subjective experience.


So it's a theory of most things..... Drinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-05-2013, 03:44 AM
RE: While I was on my way to the Philosophy forum.....
(22-05-2013 03:40 AM)I and I Wrote:  
(22-05-2013 03:26 AM)Adenosis Wrote:  I do not understand the 'Theory of Everything' to be a theory of literally everything. It is not a theory of consciousness and the nature of our subjective experience.


So it's a theory of most things..... Drinking Beverage

A theory of everything under the bridge of physics.

Don't you read?

2.5 billion seconds total
1.67 billion seconds conscious

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-05-2013, 03:51 AM
RE: While I was on my way to the Philosophy forum.....
(22-05-2013 03:44 AM)Adenosis Wrote:  
(22-05-2013 03:40 AM)I and I Wrote:  So it's a theory of most things..... Drinking Beverage

A theory of everything under the bridge of physics.

Don't you read?

Do you read about the "theory of everything"?
"A theory of everything (ToE) or final theory is a putative theory of theoretical physics that fully explains and links together all known physical phenomena, and predicts the outcome of any experiment that could be carried out in principle."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_e...rything.22
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-05-2013, 03:57 AM
RE: While I was on my way to the Philosophy forum.....
It seems there is a big gap between reading and understanding.

“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
[+] 4 users Like DeepThought's post
22-05-2013, 04:13 AM
RE: While I was on my way to the Philosophy forum.....
(22-05-2013 03:57 AM)DeepThought Wrote:  It seems there is a big gap between reading and understanding.

The theory of everything as defined by the link I gave states that the theory of everything "that fully explains and links together all known physical phenomena"

It doesn't say some physical phenomena, or most. I understand the difference between "all" and "some"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-05-2013, 05:46 AM (This post was last modified: 22-05-2013 05:51 AM by DeepThought.)
RE: While I was on my way to the Philosophy forum.....
(22-05-2013 04:13 AM)I and I Wrote:  
(22-05-2013 03:57 AM)DeepThought Wrote:  It seems there is a big gap between reading and understanding.

The theory of everything as defined by the link I gave states that the theory of everything "that fully explains and links together all known physical phenomena"

It doesn't say some physical phenomena, or most. I understand the difference between "all" and "some"

Ok, but that doesn't mean applying this theory to understand other things like the human brain. That theory isn't suited to model something on that scale with that many interactions.

It's suited to understand and simulate individual atoms (or subatomic particles) and maybe molecules in various configurations.

So understanding the core physical laws only gets you so far... Even if we find a working theory of everything, there is more than enough stuff left to figure out.

“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
22-05-2013, 06:38 AM
RE: While I was on my way to the Philosophy forum.....
(22-05-2013 05:46 AM)DeepThought Wrote:  
(22-05-2013 04:13 AM)I and I Wrote:  The theory of everything as defined by the link I gave states that the theory of everything "that fully explains and links together all known physical phenomena"

It doesn't say some physical phenomena, or most. I understand the difference between "all" and "some"

Ok, but that doesn't mean applying this theory to understand other things like the human brain. That theory isn't suited to model something on that scale with that many interactions.

It's suited to understand and simulate individual atoms (or subatomic particles) and maybe molecules in various configurations.

So understanding the core physical laws only gets you so far... Even if we find a working theory of everything, there is more than enough stuff left to figure out.

I agree. So what are the limits to this theory of everything if it includes all physical matter. We agree that physical matter like the human brain can't be included in this everything, and I would say that most living things can't be included in this "everything" so what "everything" are they referring to?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: