I forgot, Your e=mc2 and f=ma and w=mg is a match to language SvO, all in various flavours. Newton picked up his one from Alchemy, which is age old. It is actually an algorithm or recipe to represent an action divided into subject, a relation and an object as the recipient of that relation changing the subject into an object. Newton's trick is to locate gravity at centre of mass or volume whereas recent research shows it's actually a push of E.M. fields. """Subject and object are only one. The barrier between them cannot be said to have broken down as a result of recent experience in the physical sciences, for this barrier does not exist. ... Erwin schrodinger who treats it as a continuum and is into quantum world.
apple trees grow apples and while still on the apple tree it's part of the tree and when it falls off or is picked it's still part of the apple tree but at a distance just like Alan Aspect in 1982 showed particles are telepathic. And just like an antqueen and ants are still related. Kill the antqueen and the ants start milling about instead of working. Bees are one up from there but still the same, no queenbee no hive. Hope that confuses you some more though actually it's very simple. adrian Suparat Torjarern wrote: > Rick common sense is what most people need but when you talk about > theorilogical physics well it is a bit more complicated than what you > are talking about. I think at that point it is more faith orreintated > than anything. Since I don't know much about physics I will say that my > comment might be out of line but that goes to as far as I understand. I > could be wrong. > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 11:34 AM, socratus <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > > > Comment by Rick. > > Well you know there are some serious problems with the standard > model. > > And well high energy particle physics has been the big budget > backbone of physics, and yet the type of physics they engage in, > is not the type of physics you see in the every day world. > It just doesn't apply to anything other than supercolliders. > > Giant electro-magnets essentially. It is the physics of giant > electro- > magnets and so it knows nothing about mass, and everything about > what happens in a giant electro-magnet. > > Now the problem arises when you take what you have done in a giant > electro-magnet and try to say that this is how the universe works. > No, > this is how a giant electro-magnet works. > > And so then you see people spend hundreds and hundreds of billions of > dollars trying to make a fusion reactor, based on information from a > giant electro-magnet. And all attempts have failed. Not only that, > but > the recommendations made have been, look, first go back and learn how > things work, because clearly you have not got a clue what you are > doing, or how atoms work at all, so before you spend another hundred > billion dollars on yet another project which shows zero results, > perhaps you had better learn some real physics. > > And that true, because you see you can do experiment after experiment > and get absolutely nowhere, if your theory is wrong in the first > place. You will just look for results that match your hypothesis, and > you will make erroneous conclusions, and you will make further > erroneous assumptions, and none of it will be accurate, and none of > it will lead to any useful predictions. > > You know its clear to me, that either the people at the LHC do not > know much about atoms, or they are merely playing Devil's Advocate, > because they are claiming that they will be sending mass or matter > around the collider at almost the speed of light, and special > relativity says that to say that you can do that means you know > nothing much about physics at all. > > So then when they send em waves around there they call those > particles, and when they send em waves around there they can just > make > up whatever they want and they just say well energy is the same as > mass. > But E=mc2 is not about em waves it is F=ma > See how it is just renamed? Isn't a cute trick to rename old formulas > and everyone will think you are amazing? > Like Newton renamed F=ma to w=mg same thing again. > So energy equals mass times the speed of light but it is not electro- > magnetic energy, it is force. Kinetic energy. > Much of physics is about renaming things in a confusing manner in > order to make yourself famous. > To answer your question about what is the intellect, there is a > technical answer such as that your capacity depends on your computers > capacity and your software (your brain and your capacity to reason), > but there is another answer and that is that intellect is uncommon, > common sense. > > Rick. > [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
