Mike, I agree with you to a point---nature may never be undestood at
all--since even the process of "understanding" (by who?) it, is subject to
the forces of this is "unknown" (to who?) phenomenon. I however do not get
the bit on inequalities and equalities---who is measuring? What is being
measured?
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Michael Atovigba <mikeatovi...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Nature may not be understood for a long time, in my view. First,
> nature is full of inequalities rather than equalities, but
> mathematicians and physicists have made us to believe that things
> could be equated algebraecally and a solution found. Now, even two
> goats are not the same because one is a small and another a big goat.
> Hence to say at any point that we have two goats is wrong. This is the
> same for most natural objects, and here we are sttudying nature and
> using the ordinals { }, {1}, {2},...
> Added to this, all nature lacks so-called supersymmetry. Just look
> yourself up in the mirror: one of your eyeballs is bigger than
> another, your earlobes are not the same size, your buttocks are of
> different sizes. So also are natural objects. the earth's epper
> hemisphere is bigger than the southern hemisphere. The plannets are
> like that . etc. To understand the universe, i think, we must first
> accept the prevalence of inequalities over equalities. I dont believe
> in supersymmetry as a natural phenomenon. As a theory it looks good to
> me as an academic exercise.
> Mike Atovigba
>
> On 2/5/13, epistemology@googlegroups.com <epistemology@googlegroups.com>
> wrote:
> >
> =============================================================================
> > Today's Topic Summary
> >
> =============================================================================
> >
> > Group: epistemology@googlegroups.com
> > Url: http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/topics
> >
> > - Alice in Quantumland [2 Updates]
> > http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/t/b7f35a070faa792b
> > - Brain –> Consciousness , Consciousness –> Brain. [2 Updates]
> > http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/t/123242cab6efd9f5
> > - Archytas.. et al.... E.U....... Love it or Leave It?...... HAR [1
> > Update]
> > http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/t/3dd581c46707b2d2
> >
> >
> >
> =============================================================================
> > Topic: Alice in Quantumland
> > Url: http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/t/b7f35a070faa792b
> >
> =============================================================================
> >
> > ---------- 1 of 2 ----------
> > From: socratus <socra...@bezeqint.net>
> > Date: Feb 05 03:45AM -0800
> > Url: http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/msg/903f1c84989f8043
> >
> > Alice in Quantumland
> > =.
> > The theory of quantum electrodynamics describes Nature as absurd
> > from the point of view of common sense.
> > And it agrees fully with experiment.
> > So I hope you accept Nature as She is — absurd.
> > / QED : The Strange Theory of Light and Matter
> > page. 10. by R. Feynman /
> >
> > ‘ Many believe that relative theory tells us that ours
> > is a kind of Alice-in-Wonderland universe; that this
> > revealed by the mathematician Einstein who discovered
> > that there is a fourth dimension, . . . .. . . that, in short,
> > everything is relative and mysterious. ‘
> > / Book ‘Albert Einstein’ , page 4. By Leopold Infeld ./
> >
> > We still don't know that negative 4-D is. (!)
> >
> > In the other words:
> > Physicists show us the absurd and mysterious existence
> > of nature as a real fact.
> > I cannot believe that nature is absurd and mysterious.
> > I think that their interpretations in relative and
> > quantum electrodynamics theories were wrong.
> > ==..
> > ' But I don't want to go among mad people,' said Alice.
> > 'Oh, you can't help that,' said the cat. 'We're all mad here.'
> > / Lewis Carroll.
> > Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. /
> >
> > .
> >
> >
> > ---------- 2 of 2 ----------
> > From: socratus <socra...@bezeqint.net>
> > Date: Feb 05 06:42AM -0800
> > Url: http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/msg/db201ded50236845
> >
> > I think that it is possible to understand the universe
> > using usual common logical thought.
> > We need only understand in which zoo (reference frame )
> > physicists found higgs-boson and 1000 its elementary brothers.
> >
> > socratus
> >
> >
> >
> >
> =============================================================================
> > Topic: Brain –> Consciousness , Consciousness –> Brain.
> > Url: http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/t/123242cab6efd9f5
> >
> =============================================================================
> >
> > ---------- 1 of 2 ----------
> > From: archytas <nwte...@gmail.com>
> > Date: Feb 04 01:44PM -0800
> > Url: http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/msg/fc221150cfec20bd
> >
> > Interesting area. I have no clue.
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------- 2 of 2 ----------
> > From: awori achoka <awori.ach...@gmail.com>
> > Date: Feb 05 12:29PM +0300
> > Url: http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/msg/9973b0e27f289be4
> >
> > Sounds ok--but what is consciousness?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> =============================================================================
> > Topic: Archytas.. et al.... E.U....... Love it or Leave It?...... HAR
> > Url: http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/t/3dd581c46707b2d2
> >
> =============================================================================
> >
> > ---------- 1 of 1 ----------
> > From: archytas <nwte...@gmail.com>
> > Date: Feb 04 01:41PM -0800
> > Url: http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/msg/71954e7e30c7c34e
> >
> > I don't see an economic answer Nom. There are things we could do but
> > I think that would entail writing a new morality into our societies
> > concerning 'dirty hands' excuses. Walmart hasn't done well in
> > Germany.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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.
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> 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.
>
>
>
--
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.
