Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-07-10 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 09 Jul 2012, at 19:45, meekerdb wrote: On 7/9/2012 10:33 AM, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 11:26 AM, meekerdb wrote: > How do you derive fermions and bosons from comp? I don't know how to derive fermions and bosons from nothing but arithmetic but you can do the next best

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-07-10 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 09 Jul 2012, at 19:52, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: On 07.07.2012 21:54 Bruno Marchal said the following: On 07 Jul 2012, at 15:31, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: My comments to Grand Design by Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow, especially to the statement from the book “Traditionally these are ques

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-07-10 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 09 Jul 2012, at 22:01, John Mikes wrote: Bruno, thanks for your 'views' expressed to Evgeniy below. "...Why people believe..." I think we agreed that no such thing in our access as a Theory of Everything (omniscience missing) and the figments scientists believe IN are fables. Probably

Socratus: Metaphysics ( science and religion)

2012-07-10 Thread socra...@bezeqint.net
Socratus: Metaphysics ( science and religion) ==. Physics and Religion: a) T=0K b) c/d=pi, R/N=k, E/M=c^2, h=0, c=0 Mathematics and Religion: i^2= -1, e^ipi= -1 Biology and Religion: Vitalism Practice and Religion: Meditation, Parapsychology. ==. Israel Socratus -- You received this message be

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-07-10 Thread John Clark
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: > > I do not not understand in this respect your analogy with chess. You may know all the rules of chess but that does not mean you know what all the complex interactions those rules could lead to, and that is why you are not a chess grandm

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-07-10 Thread Alberto G. Corona
There is something deeply religious in many scientifics in his quest to expand their Truth. And there is also something very philosophical indeed. But they ignore both. They ignore their beliefs and their positivistic metaphisics, born in the disputes between nominalists and realists during the mid

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-07-10 Thread meekerdb
On 7/10/2012 10:49 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: There is something deeply religious in many scientifics in his quest to expand their Truth. And there is also something very philosophical indeed. But they ignore both. They ignore their beliefs and their positivistic metaphisics, born in the dispu

Oh no!

2012-07-10 Thread Stephen P. King
Say that it is not so! http://www.technologyreview.com/view/428428/higgs-boson-may-be-an-imposter-say-particle/?ref=rss -- Onward! Stephen "Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed." ~ Francis Bacon -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything L

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-07-10 Thread Evgenii Rudnyi
On 10.07.2012 09:47 Bruno Marchal said the following: ... The whole of the human sciences is perverted since theology get out of the academy. Philosophy is often just a "religious" reaction to institutionalized "religion". God id dead, said Nietzsche, so ... what do we do? In Germany theol

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-07-10 Thread Evgenii Rudnyi
On 10.07.2012 18:03 John Clark said the following: On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: I do not not understand in this respect your analogy with chess. You may know all the rules of chess but that does not mean you know what all the complex interactions those rules could l

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-07-10 Thread Evgenii Rudnyi
On 10.07.2012 19:49 Alberto G. Corona said the following: There is something deeply religious in many scientifics in his quest to expand their Truth. And there is also something very philosophical indeed. But they ignore both. They ignore their beliefs and their positivistic metaphisics, born in

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-07-10 Thread meekerdb
On 7/10/2012 12:38 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: Hence according to the authors, the M-theory governs absolutely everything including social sciences. But I am afraid that this is not what you would expect. Why would you not expect a theory-of-everything to include the behavior of people? Note t

Re: Oh no!

2012-07-10 Thread John Mikes
Stephen, a 'belief system' may be reassuring. I spent a lifetime in active R&D exercising conventional science, till I lost by belief in many figments of it. It came gradually like one's losing a religious faith: trying to THINK 'outside the box' and getting nowhere. (First reflection: I am poorly

Re: Oh no!

2012-07-10 Thread Stephen P. King
Hi John, What I have been doing is exploring the soft underbelly of physics, those sets of "truths" that are just assumed to be true. For example, I have become convinced that a lot of the difficulties in physics are due to its assumption that "substance" is primitive. There is even an ent

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-07-10 Thread Stephen P. King
On 7/7/2012 1:40 PM, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 Evgenii Rudnyi > wrote: > Hawking and Mlodinow start with the statement that free will is illusion If they said that, and I don't recall that they did, they were being much too kind in equating the "f

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

2012-07-10 Thread Alberto G. Corona
2012/7/10 meekerdb > On 7/10/2012 10:49 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: > > There is something deeply religious in many scientifics in his quest to > expand their Truth. And there is also something very philosophical indeed. > But they ignore both. They ignore their beliefs and their positivistic >