David Deutsche has been writing something similar Socratus. It's fairly clear 'big bang' thinking is affected by religious creationism and many scientists wonder on what terms like beginning mean and whether we can do more thinking on what we find now rather from myth of origin. Indeed much 'big bang replacement theory' ends up in endless regress of collisions between branes that pre-existed what we misconstrue as origin. In one way we can't get past Bishop Usher's notion that the world began in 4004 BC complete with fossil records and memories! Chemistry contemplates 500 states of matter, plays with 15 known states of water, slows down photons in Bose-Einstein condensates until a matter wave is what 'exits'. Much of what I was taught 40 years ago (valency etc.) is now thought of as heuristic. Many religions have re- invented themselves as 'a way of life' and I find it hard not to think of science in this way. I often think of our current space vehicles as similar of single-celled algae 'climbing on each other's backs' on order for some to flip off from sea-surf to the air and hence jetstream to find a 'better place' for life. We don't even know if gravity exists, yet can perform very accurate and useful calculations as though it does. It's an illusion in general relativity - which is just another way of calculating 'it'.
Overall we are clinging to this rock. A deep question for science is whether it's worth trying to survive (the gnostic hold that this is a mistake and we should stop breeding in order to return to nothingness - creation is a mistake). The only reason I can think of lies in a point in the future when we might know more - but no doubt this is about salvation of some kind and a repeat of stories of the Ark. On Jan 24, 10:35 am, socratus <socra...@bezeqint.net> wrote: > Belief . . . from history of physics. > =. > Many years Max Planck was attracted with the > absolutely black body problem. > If quantum of light moving with speed c=1 falls in the area of > absolutely black body and does not radiate back, then “ terminal > dead “ will come. In order to save the quantum of light from ‘death ‘ > Planck decided that it is possible that quantum of light > will radiate back with quantum unit (h ), (h=Et ) > This unit does not come on formulas or equations. > Planck introduced this unit from heaven, from ceiling. > Sorry. Sorry. > Scientists say: Planck introduced this unit intuitively. > They say: Planck introduced unit (h) phenomenologically > ===.. > Phenomenology. > 1. > the movement founded by Husserl that concentrates on the > detailed description of conscious experience, without recourse > to explanation, metaphysical assumptions, and traditional > philosophical > questionshttp://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/phenomenologically > ===… > So. Planck discovered the quantum of energy / action > ‘without recourse to explanation, metaphysical assumptions, > and traditional philosophical questions’. > Many years Planck tried to find rational explanation for his unit > but without success. > We can read that unit (h) is an ’inner’ impulse (spin) of particle. > But what ’inner impulse’ means? We have no answer. > ==. > There are 1000 books and millions articles about > ‘philosophy of science’ but how can I believe them > if they didn’t explain me ‘what quantum particle is’. > Our today’s belief in science is similar to the past belief > in religion: ‘ I believe because it is absurd.’ > / Tertullian. (ca.160 – ca.220 AD) / > ( in science – big bang, > in religion - God create woman from Adam’s rib.) > ==.. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
