[MD] Metaphysics

[MarshaV]

Hi Mark,

I'm finding the more some strut their scientific stuff, the more
transparent their "stuff" becomes.  It's very humorous.   


Marsha






On Jan 18, 2010, at 10:58 PM, markhsmit wrote:

> Marsha,
> 
> I see now.  My tactic is more "how do you know something
> is true if you only read it".  Yes, science is a faith, which means
> that if you do not question it, you are a true believer.  While
> there is nothing wrong with this if used in a kind and altruistic
> way, it is dangerous when one tries to convert others.
> 
> Unquestioned belief in science allows for the manipulation
> of the masses.  This is something I am truly against since
> I am for individualism.  I believe Quality can best be expressed
> through the individual, and not through an institution.
> 
> This is the difference that I see between ZAMM and Lila.  ZAMM
> is a story about a spiritual awakening, Lila is more about building
> a church, (imo).  The more structure one puts up, the lower the
> Quality.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> Mark,
> 
> No sweet Mark, I think, like you, that science too often is accepted
> without question. I asked a question. I asked Krimel if Einstein's 
> general theory of relativity was science. No trap --- no trap, no cat,
> and no mouse. 
> 
> 
> Marsha
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jan 17, 2010, at 10:45 PM, markhsmit wrote:
> 
>> Marsha,
>> Oh, so you set a trap, eh. Cat and mouse? Catch Krimel out. 
>> I guess we all learn in our own way.
>> Mark
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> No Mark, the subject was not the scientific method. The subject is deductive
>> logic which Krimel said might have problems because of NonEuclidean geometry 
>> such as Riemannian geometry, which Einstein used in the general theory of
>> relativity. But he'd rather dance away with a Ouiji board. Fine. 
>>  
>> Marsha 
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> On Jan 17, 2010, at 11:27 AM, markhsmit wrote:
>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>> [Marsha]
>>>> I think I remember that Einstein used Riemannian geometry in the general
>>>> theory of relativity. 
>>>> Is the general theory of relativy science? 
>>>>  
>>>> [Krimel]
>>>> It is a work of theoretical physics.
>>>  
>>> Marsha:
>>> I guess you are saying that theoretical physics, Einstein's general theory 
>>> of relativity, is not science because it uses deductive logic which is not 
>>> the basis of the scientific method. 
>>>  
>>> [Krimel]
>>> Scientists employ any means they wish to construct a theory or a hypothesis.
>>> They can use induction or deduction. They can see it in a dream or get it
>>> from a Ouija board. But, the theory has to be testable, It needs to offer
>>> some improvement in our understanding or our ability to make predictions.
>>> That is, a new theory has to improve our ability to reduce uncertainty.
>>> Einstein's theory offered predictions about certain observable events that
>>> differed from Newton's theory.
>>> [Mark]
>>> Marsha,
>>> What you seem to be asking is what is the scientific method. As Krimel suggests, one
>>> of the results of the scientific method is predictability. In hindsight one could say
>>> that if predictability results, a scientific method was used. This kind of explanation
>>> is useful for illumination purposes. Another way to view it, is that the
>>> scientific method is really just an elaborate extension of what we all do every day.
>>> When you put your hand in the shower to see if it is warm enough, that is the
>>> scientific method. The science is predicting that at a certain interval the water will
>>> become warm enough to get in. To become more scientific about it, you would
>>> time the interval that it takes to get warm with a watch. If you pay attention, then
>>> you may notice that it takes longer if it is cold outside. So, you have to introduce
>>> a new variable, that is the temperature outside. Also the rate of warming depends
>>> on how fast the water is flowing. As the detail of these observations grow, the
>>> predictability gets better. This is no different from other empirical studies, they
>>> just get more and more complicated. Measurement, prediction, measurement
>>> prediction, introduction of new variable, prediction, measurement, test for accuracy.
>>>  
>>> Those that are good at this, compile many of these variables in their heads without
>>> knowing it and can take jumps. They can amalgamate seemingly unrelated observations
>>> and bring them into the equation. These genius leaps mark a good scientist, and
>>> are similar to genius leaps in art, sports, and, yes, even religion. Einstein was
>>> able to do this with general relativity. However to do so he had to go against
>>> conventional thinking. This is also the mark of a creative scientist, which
>>> are periodically needed to bridge seemingly wrong data. Many of Einstein's
>>> predictions took years to prove afterwards. He based much of his
>>> science on math, which has a remarkable property of predicting what
>>> we observe. The trick is trying to understand what the equations mean
>>> in the real world, and whether they are useful. An infinite number of
>>> equations can be formulated, only a few are useful. An intuitive
>>> grasp of the right choice is needed as it gets more complicated.
>>>  
>>> So, there is nothing mysterious about the scientific method, you use
>>> it all the time.
>>>  
>>> Cheers,
>>> Mark
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>>  
>>> Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars... 
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>>> Archives:
>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>>>  
>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>>> Archives:
>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>>>  
>>>  
>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>>> Archives:
>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>>  
>>  
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>  
>> Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars... 
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>>  
>>  
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 
> Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars... 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> 
> 
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

  
_______________________________________________________________________
   
Shoot for the moon.  Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars...