Hello Neil I'll take your final statement... we are missing something
May be the missing something is part of the structure itself and it is the leif motive of science. She looks for the missing something IMO I agree with the "missing" part of the idea, but I certainly doubt about the "thing". The vacuum idea has its fundamentals, somewhere must be a vacuum, but also in that same instance there is a "missing" idea which contradicts the vacuum itself. Should not be bad to install a concept which is at the same time empty and missing .... ? carlos On 26 mar, 19:21, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > I tend to prefer the likes of dark matter to fixed belief in blue and > white rabbit gods Craig - but you are right that much more is > speculative than we credit and we are missing something. > > On Mar 26, 4:01 pm, Craig Weinberg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mar 26, 9:59 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > A singularity of your 'everythingness' is electron. > > > An electron is a part of the universe. The singularity can only be the > > entire universe. > > > > The richness of material world begun from fluctuation - > > > - polarization of primordial vacuum . > > > Fluctuation in what way? Emptiness regularly becoming emptiness? What > > could it mean for a vacuum to have any properties whatsoever? > > > > ==. > > > Why electron is responsible for fluctuations in a vacuum? > > > Because an electron has its own m mass and q charge. > > > But (according to QED) by interaction with vacuum electron’s > > > mass and charge becomes infinite ( electron is hidden in vacuum > > > and we say he is virtual particle – antiparticle - antielectron – > > > positron) > > > To me it's much more likely to be a just-so story to plug the > > equations. The equations don't take sense into account so they are > > probably wrongly interpreted and we have to make up all kinds of > > science fiction to save the model. > > > If an electron is responsible for fluctuations in a vacuum then the > > fluctuations are in the electron, not in the vacuum. The vacuum is > > empty. There's nothing there to fluctuate. Virtual particle is just a > > name for the fact that we don't understand what is going on and wish > > for a deus ex particulus to save ourselves from the reality of having > > to start over from scratch and reinterpret all of physics. It's just > > stubborn sentimentality but now it it metastasizing into fanciful > > delusions. > > > > And when we see the 'fluctuations' of vacuum it means electron > > > appears from vacuum, electron again acquire its usual mass and charge. > > > Mass and charge are probably semantic conditions arising from sense > > relationships within matter and across space. The electron itself may > > not even be real. As far as I know electrons have only been studied > > using instruments made of matter, so electrons, photons, the whole > > Standard Model could be nothing more than shared atomic moods and > > motives (which look like particles, waves, images, rays, twinkles, > > signs and symbols, depending on what perceptual inertial frame the > > observation is grounded in). > > > I think that it is extremely likely that at present, our worldview is > > in the last gasp of post Enlightenment modeling - a Dark Ages for > > understanding awareness which has pathologized our science and > > culture. As long as we look for emptiness and absence to find our > > origins, we will only be able to find evidence of meaningless > > mechanism and convince ourselves of our own non-existence. > > > Craig -- 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.
