Re: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

2008-12-03 Thread xponentrob
- Original Message - From: Dan M [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion' brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:06 PM Subject: RE: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto

Re: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

2008-12-03 Thread Nick Arnett
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 3:28 PM, xponentrob [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's not really productive to worry too much about what is real and what is virtual, since there is no firm basis for the categorization. Particles are a quantized bias in the field fluctuations that compose reality, and as

RE: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

2008-12-02 Thread Dan M
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of xponentrob Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 11:06 PM To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion Subject: Re: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations Umyeah. Though I have

RE: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

2008-12-01 Thread Alberto Monteiro
rob/xponent wrote: Models make predictions. And over time models have made predictions with greater accuracy and that cover more situations that previous models failed. Mercury anyone? Mercury's extra precession could be modeled using Classical Mechanics, it was just a matter of

RE: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

2008-12-01 Thread Ronn! Blankenship
At 05:14 AM Monday 12/1/2008, Alberto Monteiro wrote: rob/xponent wrote: Models make predictions. And over time models have made predictions with greater accuracy and that cover more situations that previous models failed. Mercury anyone? Mercury's extra precession could be modeled

RE: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

2008-12-01 Thread Dan M
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rceeberger Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2008 9:47 PM To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion Subject: RE: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations On 11/30/2008 5:30:23 PM, Dan M

Re: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

2008-12-01 Thread xponentrob
- Original Message - From: Dan M [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion' brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 10:03 PM Subject: RE: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto

Re: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

2008-11-30 Thread Ronn! Blankenship
At 08:25 PM Saturday 11/29/2008, Bruce Bostwick wrote: (Although to be fair, classical mechanics does sum up pretty well what we see on our scale. It's just right for the wrong reasons, is all. :) Why is it for the wrong reasons? Some would say that if it leads to predictions which match

Re: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

2008-11-30 Thread Rceeberger
On 11/30/2008 2:26:19 AM, Ronn! Blankenship ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: At 08:25 PM Saturday 11/29/2008, Bruce Bostwick wrote: (Although to be fair, classical mechanics does sum up pretty well what we see on our scale. It's just right for the wrong reasons, is all. :) Why is it for the

RE: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

2008-11-30 Thread Dan M
Rob wrote: If physics were anything more than approximate, we would have final answers to all our questions. How? All physics does is model observations. Physics was created out of Natural Philosophy by tabling the question of the reliability of observations. Now, you can use the results of

RE: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

2008-11-30 Thread Rceeberger
On 11/30/2008 5:30:23 PM, Dan M ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Rob wrote: If physics were anything more than approximate, we would have final answers to all our questions. How? All physics does is model observations. Models make predictions. And over time models have made predictions with

RE: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

2008-11-29 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Original Message: - From: Rceeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 09:04:20 -0600 To: brin-l@mccmedia.com Subject: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16095-its-confirmed-matter-is-merely-v

RE: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

2008-11-29 Thread Rceeberger
On 11/29/2008 11:50:26 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Original Message: - From: Rceeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 09:04:20 -0600 To: brin-l@mccmedia.com Subject: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

Re: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

2008-11-29 Thread Nick Arnett
On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Rceeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We can understand philosophy much easier than maths, they are easier for us to discuss and digest. Hmmph. Your father apparently wasn't a philosophy professor. Nick J'ai faim, puisque je suis.

Re: It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

2008-11-29 Thread Bruce Bostwick
On Nov 29, 2008, at 1:18 PM, Rceeberger wrote: Agree with what you are trying to say. I think that as a magazine, NS is trying to engage lay folk and other scientists whose expertise doesn't extend very far into QM. For most of us the metaphysics *is* the important aspect of QM. It helps