Tom Sarbeck
@tomsarbeck
Active 7 years, 3 months ago-
tom sarbeck replied to the topic If there is no God, how to explain mathematics? in the forum Science 7 years, 8 months ago
Unseen, adding 112 and 545 in octal or hex is also a snap.
No column adds to more than 7 so none requires a carry.
-
tom sarbeck replied to the topic If there is no God, how to explain mathematics? in the forum Science 7 years, 8 months ago
Unseen, do you know what else doesn’t pass the snicker test?
Aliens.
–
-
tom sarbeck replied to the topic If there is no God, how to explain mathematics? in the forum Science 7 years, 8 months ago
Has anyone noticed the many attempts in this discussion to attach something concocted by humankind (math, rules, limits, logic, etc) to the universe?
The universe pays no attention.
Humankind have also—again and again—concocted and tried to attach to the universe a beginning and an end.
There too, the universe pays no attention.
Do you fee…[Read more]
-
tom sarbeck replied to the topic If there is no God, how to explain mathematics? in the forum Science 7 years, 8 months ago
jake, “math is in fabric of the universe….”?
Where did you find this ‘fabric’?
Does it, like the relativists’ fabric, resemble a sort of trampoline?
-
tom sarbeck joined the group
Humanism 7 years, 8 months ago -
tom sarbeck replied to the topic If there is no God, how to explain mathematics? in the forum Science 7 years, 9 months ago
Pure potentiality = Anything can happen. What would be there to place limits on what might happen?
Without humankind the mathematical would not be there but the physical would be there.
The rub is that without humankind, there would be no one to know what limits there are that can be taken away so that anything can happen.
Two probable limits…[Read more]
-
tom sarbeck replied to the topic If there is no God, how to explain mathematics? in the forum Science 7 years, 9 months ago
Another stab.
Reality is not all mathematical; it’s all physical.
Without humankind, neither mathematics nor rules exist.
Humankind uses mathematics and rules to approximate reality.
Define pure potentiality, without mention of humankind’s rules.
To say anything that’s possible according to the rules can happen places rules over reali…[Read more]
-
tom sarbeck replied to the topic For Starters… in the forum
Consciousness 7 years, 9 months agoYeah, what if consciousness DOES HAVE A USE FOR the species that appear to possess it?
Oh, HORRORS! And we heard that genes are selfish ! ! !
-
tom sarbeck replied to the topic For Starters… in the forum
Consciousness 7 years, 9 months agoPB, your analysis merits some thinking.
But those cotton-picking habits of speech….
”…is consciousness just a byproduct of intelligence or did (does?) it serve a purpose for the species that appear to possess it?”
I would write “…is consciousness just a byproduct of intelligence or did (does?) it have a use for the species that appea…[Read more]
-
tom sarbeck posted an update in the group
Politics 7 years, 9 months agoHere in the former colonies, my bumper sticker view is:
Democrats are dumb; Republicans are cruel. (Details available.) -
tom sarbeck joined the group
Politics 7 years, 9 months ago -
tom sarbeck posted an update in the group
Consciousness 7 years, 9 months agoDoes consciousness have a use? (a USE, not a purpose.)
An analogy: a hammer has a use, to drive nails. Without nails, would hammers exist? I think not, so I would start with Does consciousness has a use?-
Does self-amusement count?
-
Go out on a limb, pb, and answer it y’self.
-
I will. When needed, we always have time to think and wind up a position or two, mate. 🙂
-
-
-
As I currently think of consciousness as an “emergent” character, I’m not sure how precisely to answer that, other than to say that ALL brain processes result from evolutionary tuning. How those processes together are “used” is most probably understood insofar as to how they enhance individual survivabilty, and species survivability, including…[Read more]
-
Any use that results in a being’s wanting to put the consciousness to that same use again would have evolutionary value.
Does self-amusement count? Does it have a number system: 1, 2, 3, …, n?-
Humor in general seems to be useful in a social environment. Maybe self-amusement stems from that and is useful just like an in-mind rehearsal before taking it public.
Specifically, when it comes to laughter, it seems to be a way to communicate that one is thinking of or experiencing something that is expected to be “very interesting, if not fun”…[Read more]
-
-
-
-
tom sarbeck joined the group
Consciousness 7 years, 9 months ago -
tom sarbeck replied to the topic Quantum Mechanics – Pilot Wave proposals in the forum
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 7 years, 9 months agoPB, you ask softball questions. I play hardball and ignore them.
You want fair?
Click on the Chris Reeves article I linked to a while ago. To the right on the page you will see is a menu on which you can start your own personal journey.
-
tom sarbeck replied to the topic Quantum Mechanics – Pilot Wave proposals in the forum
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 7 years, 9 months agoThis discussion on the kind of science that requires evidence and reason is becoming a discussion on science fiction. No thanks, PB, Reg and Robert.
-
tom sarbeck replied to the topic Quantum Mechanics – Pilot Wave proposals in the forum
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 7 years, 9 months agoAw-ww, Beanie. Quantum entanglement? Stuff popping in and out of existence?
Einstein did not start the anti-empiricism of our time but with his thought-experiments, his hatred of laboratory work, and his arbitrary limit on the speed of light, he gave scifi a boost. Isaac Newton’s religiosity may have blinded him to a speed of gravity that is o…[Read more]
-
tom sarbeck posted an update in the group
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 7 years, 9 months agoClaim:
The hot bang best matches our observations,
Debunk:
The hot bang results from:
1) a hypothesis without evidence that because red shift (light) is a Doppler effect (sound), the universe is expanding, and
2) its expansion began from an imagined infinitely small and infinitely hot point. (LeMaitre’s ‘primeval atom).
None of that was obs…[Read more]-
Well, as for your first point it’s a wonder that the thousands of airborne weather RADARs I have designed over the years are able to detect turbulence and windshear as they do by looking for opposing doppler shifts of the electromagnetic pulse that we transmit. We then alert you pilot so he or she doesn’t kill you. Its not like we are an audio…[Read more]
-
Robert, you say the radars you designed looked for opposing doppler SHIFTS. How certain are you that the radars did not look for doppler EFFECTS?
Scroll down to the Brain Cox-Darwin interview you posted five months back. One month later (just above it), I posted Edwin Hubble’s use of both terms. You will see they are not synonomous. -
Further, Robert, the Zwicky I cited in my below reply to Pope Beanie said tired light accounts for what Bangers refer to as doppler shifts.
In short, doppler shifts do not exist in electromagnetism, but legions of Bangers insist that they do exist.
Similar misuse of language was standard practice among people working in the Apollo program. They…[Read more]
-
-
Then what causes red shift? (I dare you to evade yet another reasonable question!)
-
First, PB, a reply that requires some knowledge of physics.
“Zwicky suggested that photons might slowly lose energy as they travel vast distances through a static universe by interaction with matter or other photons, or by some novel physical mechanism. Since a decrease in energy corresponds to an increase in light’s wavelength, this effect w…[Read more] -
Continuing the above where interupted by a fingertip’s accidental touch.
…As the Wiki article says, longer wave lengths survive their journey better than short wave lengths. The surviving wave lengths APPEAR to have been shifted. Bangers, having studied neither art nor electricity, gets things all wrong.BTW, I ignored your previous q…[Read more]
-
-
OK, I see now that (at least some) physicists differentiate between the terms “doppler effect” and “doppler shift”. So, you’re not actually saying that recession of a star or galaxy does not cause redshift, but you’re saying that there is more than one possible cause of redshift. Right? (The physicist that I just read:…[Read more]
-
Beanie, the physicist you cite assumes the truth of expansion, aka recession.
He assumes he sees all the wavelengths and concludes they are stretched,
Instead, the shorter wavelengths do not survive their journey so he sees only the longer wavelengths.
Then, like religious folk, he tells a story.
-
Read carefully what Edwin Hubble said:
If … a Doppler shift, a curiously small, dense, suspiciouly young universe.
If … not Doppler effects, a universe extended indefinitely in space and time.Bye bye Big Bang.
-
Tom, why don’t you just explain the difference between an electromagnetic doppler shift and a doppler effect, since I know a RADAR return is frequency shifted in either direction, proportionate to the velocity and direction of the target and that velocity is calculated by the doppler equation. Yes, the calculation for mechanical soundwaves are…[Read more]
-
Robert, this discussion is about light on a one-way trip, not a radar signal on a two-way trip.
It’s also about the loss of some of the light being interpreted as a frequency shift. I don’t know if some of the radar signal is being lost.As to a distinction between doppler shift and doppler effect, check Edwin Hubble’s use of the terms in my…[Read more]
-
-
-
-
-
tom sarbeck posted an update in the group
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 7 years, 9 months agoNeil deGrasse Tyson opens the first chapter of his book “Astrophysics for People in a Hurry” with:
“In the beginning, nearly 14 billion years ago, all the space and all the matter and all the energy of the known universe was contained in a volume less than one trillionth the size of the period that ends this sentence.”I don’t see that as eviden…[Read more]
-
Hi Tom,
“I don’t see that as evidence. Do you?”
No. In itself it’s not purported to be evidence – it’s a statement of fact. I’m confident that NGT would love for you (or anyone else) to challenge the evidence behind this statement. As I’m not physicist of or a cosmologist I’m not going to waste my time trying. At this point it’s a matter of t…[Read more]
-
I’m not a diehard banger. It’s just that they seem to have the best ideas for what to research next in the quest to understand the univers, and a large enough community willing to spend time on it and try to educate us. I can’t even get straight talk from you about what kind of research you think the scientific community should work on next. All I…[Read more]
-
Take a cue from your father, PB.
The Bang is a bunch of math-inclined folk who, to keep their taxpayer funding, are using a Genesis-like origin story to win allies in Congress.
-
-
-
tom sarbeck replied to the topic Away With Words in the forum Small Talk 7 years, 10 months ago
I too believe U will have another beer.
-
tom sarbeck replied to the topic Science As A Personal Journey in the forum Science 7 years, 10 months ago
PB, as this discussion’s opening post says, science is a personal journey. What works for me won’t work for you. Are you certain you want to start the journey?
- Load More
