Stathis: would you condone to include in your (appreciated) post below the words at the * I plant into your text? The words: "in the (scientific?) belief system we have TODAY about our interpretation of whatever epistemically we so far learned about the 'world'." That would underline your subsequent sentence - if you kindly stop denigrating the term 'metaphysics' - a pejoration of the same 'carried away' physicists.
The word 'prediction' also sends the chill alongside my spine: how can a model based on a model predict events subject to impact from 'beyond model' changes? The many results of science-technology should not lead us into a generalized acceptance of the model-based thinking. This list is a good example. John Mikes ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stathis Papaioannou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 8:54 PM Subject: RE: The anti-roadmap - an alternative 'Theology' As Brent Meeker has pointed out, physical theories are just models to make predictions about how the world works*. If physists get carried away and say "this is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" then they are talking metaphysics, not physics. Stathis Papaioannou ---------------------------------------- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: email@example.com > Subject: Re: The anti-roadmap - an alternative 'Theology' > Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 11:51:07 -0400 > > > Stathis, > > you touched the 'truth' (a word I put into "-" because I don't believe it). > Matter > cannot be an "is" - actually or virtually. Rutherford's empty atom shows the > dichotomy between 'effects' ('affects'?) and 'explanation' (more than just > words). > The figment 'matter' is a product of 'mental evolution' in this universe, to > catch imputes we cannot handle. 'We' is here the mental evolution of the > universe. It was not man, or the old ape who decided "let there be matter in > our thinking" - it was a zillion-stepwise development to cope with 'affects' > we experienced without better explanation. So we (humans and animals) > nowadays (~1b years?) accept the notion that 'there IS matter' and we can > interact with it. Physics is a product in this development of reductionist > efforts to 'organize' our world for ourselves. > And then came the other sciences as well, in the same reductionism. > > We better do not chase a figment, as long as we are living IN IT - accept > its use and the uncertainty of whatever we talk about. It looks like a basic > tenet in our "percept of reality" - the "what we see is what we live with" > from which I TRY to get to a better understanding (not yet achieved, of > course). All our life, the base knowledge, the technology, the mental > construct, is a product of this figment. > > Yes, matter is not matterly, just believed so. Energy is a cop-out - a > 'name' for something we cannot put our finger on (mentally). And so are > numbers. > > The theories you decry, or promote, all of them, are in the same circle. > > Regards > > John Mikes > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Stathis Papaioannou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "1Z" <firstname.lastname@example.org> > Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 5:11 AM > Subject: RE: The anti-roadmap - an alternative 'Theology' > > > > Peter Jones writes: > > > Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > > > I can agree. No physicist posit matter in a fundamental theory. > > > > All physical theories are theories of matter (mass/energy). > > True, but they are not theories of what matter *actually is*. At > the turn of last century Rutherford showed that atoms were mostly > empty space. Tables and chairs did not suddenly become less solid as > a result, but it became clear that their apparent solidity was not > actually evidence that atoms are solid all the way through. In a similar > fashion, the apparent solidity of matter is not actually evidence that it > isn't just fluff all the way down, or part of a computer simulation. Our > physical theories describe the behaviour of matter without formally > addressing this question at all, despite what prejudices and working > assumptions physicists may have about the true basis of physical reality. > > Stathis Papaioannou > _________________________________________________________________ > Be one of the first to try Windows Live Mail. > http://ideas.live.com/programpage.aspx?versionId=5d21c51a-b161-4314-9b0e-491 > 1fb2b2e6d > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.5/425 - Release Date: 08/22/06 > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ Be one of the first to try Windows Live Mail. http://ideas.live.com/programpage.aspx?versionId=5d21c51a-b161-4314-9b0e-491 1fb2b2e6d -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.5/425 - Release Date: 08/22/06 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to email@example.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---