Lucid Dreaming

13»

Comments

  • OutOfBreath
    OutOfBreath Posts: 1,804
    But ahnimus, it does beg the question whether we can claim full or full-enough knowledge on a subject, even if we have some applications that hold true. Just cause something works, doesnt mean we know exactly how it works. We have theories, but few or none completely certain ones.

    Newtonian physics works great even today, but it is not correct or accurate according to the understanding we now have gained about atoms, quantums and the universe.

    Peace
    Dan
    "YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death

    "Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    But ahnimus, it does beg the question whether we can claim full or full-enough knowledge on a subject, even if we have some applications that hold true. Just cause something works, doesnt mean we know exactly how it works. We have theories, but few or none completely certain ones.

    Newtonian physics works great even today, but it is not correct or accurate according to the understanding we now have gained about atoms, quantums and the universe.

    Peace
    Dan

    Maybe you should be applying Gödel's theorum to Quantum Mechanics instead of Newtonian Physics.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • baraka
    baraka Posts: 1,268
    angelica wrote:
    ;)

    Lol! Of course, I should have known!!!;)
    The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance,
    but the illusion of knowledge.
    ~Daniel Boorstin

    Only a life lived for others is worth living.
    ~Albert Einstein
  • OutOfBreath
    OutOfBreath Posts: 1,804
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Maybe you should be applying Gödel's theorum to Quantum Mechanics instead of Newtonian Physics.
    Put another way, for all practical purposes, newtonian physics seem to be working just nicely. His laws still works. However, as scientists delve deeper into how things are pout together and work, the theory doesnt fit anymore. I meant it as an illustration that even if we have applicable findings, that doesnt mean we know exactly how it all fits together.

    And if we are going to go with what "scientists" say, you won't find many today that insists that Newton's mechanical universe holds true. There are several things that theory can't explain, that we need some new theory for. And this new theory, if we agree on that in the end, will probably also be discarded at a later point.

    The point of the theorem is that it is impossible to have complete knowledge inside a rational framework. Knowledge is possible. The fallacy is to believe at any point that we now have the full truth, or that we will get there someday somehow.

    Now I'm off to bed. Seriously.

    Peace
    Dan
    "YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death

    "Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
  • baraka
    baraka Posts: 1,268
    Ahnimus wrote:
    But again, we don't see that being as broadly applied as you've tried to do here. We haven't seen the complete collapse of understanding and our current understandings for the large part hold true. I don't see it as an effective tool for understanding. Pi still works as Pi and has many mathmatical applications that hold true. So I don't see Gödel's theory affecting Pi. ☺


    Using Pi is poor example and I meant to comment on it before. Pi is an observation of the ratio of the circumference divided by its diameter. It is constant even though it is an irrational, meaning that it doesn't terminate. I'm talking about complex theorems, not simple ratios.

    What I'm saying is even if all things could be represented mathematically, there will always lie paradoxical and contradictory results or statements.


    Is this a thread about Lucid dreaming? I had a weird dream last night...............

    Edit: I dig the smiley :)
    The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance,
    but the illusion of knowledge.
    ~Daniel Boorstin

    Only a life lived for others is worth living.
    ~Albert Einstein
  • baraka
    baraka Posts: 1,268
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Maybe you should be applying Gödel's theorum to Quantum Mechanics instead of Newtonian Physics.

    Godel applies to both, since it is based in math.
    The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance,
    but the illusion of knowledge.
    ~Daniel Boorstin

    Only a life lived for others is worth living.
    ~Albert Einstein
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    baraka wrote:
    Godel applies to both, since it is based in math.

    But in SS's case, he is applying it to Newtonian Phsyics by implying that Quantum Physics is entirely correct.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    baraka wrote:
    Using Pi is poor example and I meant to comment on it before. Pi is an observation of the ratio of the circumference divided by its diameter. It is constant even though it is an irrational, meaning that it doesn't terminate. I'm talking about complex theorems, not simple ratios.

    What I'm saying is even if all things could be represented mathematically, there will always lie paradoxical and contradictory results or statements.


    Is this a thread about Lucid dreaming? I had a weird dream last night...............

    Edit: I dig the smiley :)

    But again, re: will, I do not see how A != A. How does A determine A? It seems like a simple math, it simply doesn't work.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire