[I]It is wrong to think that the task of physics is to find out how Nature is. Physics concerns what we say about Nature.
//[/I]
[I]Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be regarded as real.[/I]
[I]//[/I]
[I]No, no, you’re not thinking; you’re just being logical.[/I]
[I]//[/I]
[I]The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth.[/I]
[I]//[/I]
[I]We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct. My own feeling is that it is not crazy enough.[/I]
[I]//[/I]
[I]When it comes to atoms, language can be used only as in poetry. The poet, too, is not nearly so concerned with describing facts as with creating images.
[/I]
[I][B]Niels Bohr[/B][/I]
message from a great scientist
A human being is part of a whole, called by us the “Universe,” a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings, as something separated from the rest- a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us.Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circles of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.
Albert Einstein
IMHO once people do understand this, there are no more wars.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oak333
By matter people understand what they perceive with their senses. But how are the senses acting ?
One clear example of the sense delusion is the theory of relativity of Einstein.
He shows clearly how are senses are deceived, how we measure incorrectly the length and time… His “mind experiments” are well known.
Just have fun with Einstein’s mind experiments.
http://aether.lbl.gov/www/classes/p1.../gedanken.html
Note how your mind and senses can deceive you.
It looks like the link posted here does not work. Try again
Nice link, really thought provoking.
I will go a little further along your line of thinking.
In quantum mechanics it is known the DUAL aspect of particles (electrons, neutrons etc): they are BOTH matter and vibration (waves).
The position of particles is described by the equation of Schrodinger:
there is only a PROBABILITY to find a certain particle in a certain position at a certain time
Physics to me:
Another of man’s attempt to understand the nature of the universe.
An incomplete truth.
I applaud those that follow that path.
[QUOTE=nameless;21357]Physics to me:
Another of man’s attempt to understand the nature of the universe.
An incomplete truth.
I applaud those that follow that path.[/QUOTE]
Personally I do not see anything wrong with physics and the human efforts to understand the nature. In the process, the people have made many discoveries like radio, TV, car, plain etc. The life of an average citizen in a developed country is actually more comfortable now than the life of emperors centuries ago, No emperor had access to Internet, like you do.
This is the material part and I do not see God angered about the scientifical discoveries per se. How you use them…that’s another matter.
Now the physcists have discovered things which make you automatically think about God: dual nature of nature (wave and particle), limits of knowledge (indeterministic principle of Heisenberg), God;s particle from which all elementary particles are made (Higgs bosons), limits of causality, holographic concept of reality etc etc. All these discoveries reinforce faith in God actually. There are six billon people on this planet; not all of them are meant to meditate secluded in a forest.
Science and Vedas
You can see here how much closer science cones to Vedas.
It is a huge subject.
http://www.hinduism.co.za/hinduism.htm#The%20Implications%20of%20this%20theorem%20are%20staggering
[QUOTE=oak333;21358]Personally I do not see anything wrong with physics and the human efforts to understand the nature. In the process, the people have made many discoveries like radio, TV, car, plain etc. The life of an average citizen in a developed country is actually more comfortable now than the life of emperors centuries ago, No emperor had access to Internet, like you do.
This is the material part and I do not see God angered about the scientifical discoveries per se. How you use them…that’s another matter.
Now the physcists have discovered things which make you automatically think about God: dual nature of nature (wave and particle), limits of knowledge (indeterministic principle of Heisenberg), God;s particle from which all elementary particles are made (Higgs bosons), limits of causality, holographic concept of reality etc etc. All these discoveries reinforce faith in God actually. There are six billon people on this planet; not all of them are meant to meditate secluded in a forest.[/QUOTE]
I do not see god in any of this. Quantum mechanics is a point of view. When you reduce the dimensions so that they approach the sub-atomice scale ( 60’s standard model) then the particles that looked like waves, act like particles. Physics developed a mathematical model to explain that behavior. The Higgs boson is an undetected particle in the current standard model. Some have attached labels to it. It is believed this is the particle that explains mass. Even if it found by the large Hadron collider, it still will not explain gravity sufficiently. The person that can do that will be the next Einstein.
Or the devil himself.
[QUOTE=Hubert;21420]Or the devil himself.[/QUOTE]
Or neither. This is a difficult medium to express larger views. I only used the name Einstein so as to fix a relative point in time and space. Others were coming to these insights also at this time. Ironically, it was Einstein’s belief in god that was his undoing in the physics community. His first Nobel prize paper essentially defined quantum physics. The probabilistic nature of the mathematics caused Einstein to reject quantum mechanics as god did not play dice with the world. He was an outcast in the theoretical physics community by the 40’s. Or was it the nature of mathematics that failed Einstein?
Either way, he was a man of enormous insight like Newton, Farraday and many many others before and since. The human species likes labeling things that they consider of great import.
I think I know what you meant. Thanks for the additional information. I had the chance to know a few young physicists. To listen to their sparkling conversations was always refreshing. The strenght, clarity and flexibility of thought these people posess is impressive. The given example (Einstein/God) shows, though that this is yet superficial, and not free from one’s beliefs. Life is always larger than a domain of intellectual activity and one’s beleifs are forged by life itself, not just one’s intellect. I am sure that Enstein’s beliefs can at least partially be credited for giving him the ability to overcome the dominant views of his time, the ability to come up with a fresh perspective. It often comes down to what one dares to question.
The mentioned conversations always boiled down to " we don’t know … yet", to an open attitude saturated by the hope and belief that the universe is comprehensible. What is called insight is nothing but having a more encompassing general view, and the intuition of how the details can be sorted through it’s usage. It is a mental map, not very specific, but usable exactly because of this quality; one will not stumble on obstacles, but learns to avoid them by a larger arch of movement. We only have the pieces of a great puzzle - we can feel that something like a picture is formed on a lower scale but there are always some annoying, unfitting elements. The ability to not jump to the first possible explanation but to wait patiently until we have a larger view, is the bases of creative thinking, when we not only sort out existing elements of the puzzle, but based on the larger view, we manage to predict the existence of unseen elements. And if the larger view is right, than we might even find the actual elements being there where we supposed them to be. Thus we can see that a personal ability like patience can have a huge effect on one’s thinking - and this is just one of many. Because of this, we must not assume that our science is universally valid, but we need to realize that most of the time it is creation of our minds, and thus an imperfect approximation.
The objectivity of scientific thought builds on the clarity of our wake consciusness, and it abhorrs the effects of much less conscious emotional and will impulses. But this fear of subjectivity will not make them go away, and do not save us from determining our world view in a subconscious-unconscious manner. This is indeed a great obstacle. And because bringing awarness to these areas of our lives requires a huge amount of work on ourselves, usually perceieved as “moral” practices belonging to art and religion, there will be always more or less bridgeable crevices between those who are advanced in this direction to various degrees. The resposnability in this case is that of the more advanced one - to go back to just a step ahead of the other one, and comple him to make that step on his own. There is no solitary salvation, no enlightemnt for just oneself. That is the dark path, what leads eventually to one’s doom.
[QUOTE=nameless;21391]I do not see god in any of this. Quantum mechanics is a point of view. When you reduce the dimensions so that they approach the sub-atomice scale ( 60’s standard model) then the particles that looked like waves, act like particles. Physics developed a mathematical model to explain that behavior. The Higgs boson is an undetected particle in the current standard model. Some have attached labels to it. It is believed this is the particle that explains mass. Even if it found by the large Hadron collider, it still will not explain gravity sufficiently. The person that can do that will be the next Einstein.[/QUOTE]
Well, an unified field theory is the dream of physicists, starting with Einstein
He (and Minkowski) were the first to try it.
What does it mean ? Put simply, to have set of equations from which all
basic laws of nature (Newton’s mechanics, Maxwell electromagnetis,
gravity, nuclear forces -wek or strong forces- maybe the dark energy etc) can be deduced.
Is it possible ? Nobody really knows but everyone seems to believe it is.
The Standard Model seems to be the closest, and the most established.
IMHO even if such an unified field theory can be developed. it will be temporary. Cause: other and other phenomena will be discovered, like dark matter, dark energy.
Put it otherwise: you cannot approximate the infinite by finite. That does not mean that you do not have to try. These attempts always lead to other grand discoveries…not explained by your present theories.
[QUOTE=nameless;21429]Or neither. His first Nobel prize paper essentially defined quantum physics. [/QUOTE]
Einstein got the Nobel prize in 1905 for the explanation of the photoelectric effect.
Generally the quantum mechanics is believed to have been introduced by Max Planck, who introduced the concept of “quantas.”
Science and Vedas
It is absolutely fascinating:
http://www.hinduism.co.za/hinduism.htm#The%20Implications%20of%20this%20theorem%20are%20staggering
Bell’s theorem:
“If the statistical predictions of quantum theory are true, an objective universe is
incompatible with the law of local causes.”
So the quantum mechanics is in contradiction with the existence of an objective world.
Read about ERP effect (ERP=Einstein + Rosen + Podolsky).
It is a world out there in this theorem.
It looks the Bell theorem supports the vision of the world of the Rishis.
This is a huge topic.
Indeed … and it neesd time to chew.
[QUOTE=nameless;21391]. The Higgs boson is an undetected particle in the current standard model. Some have attached labels to it. It is believed this is the particle that explains mass. Even if it found by the large Hadron collider, it still will not explain gravity sufficiently. The person that can do that will be the next Einstein.[/QUOTE]
Well, Higgs bosons are extremely small, smaller than the electrons and even neutrinos. A neutrino is so small and has a cross section (probability of
interaction) so small that it can go through whole planets undistrurbed, without interaction with the matter of the planets. And yet, neutrinos were
experimentally detected. Initailly they were only a theoretical concept, like Higgs bosons nowadays.
Note: for people less familiar with atomic physics: do not confuse
neutrons with neutrinos.
Obviously Higgs bosons, supposing they exist, will not explain gravity. Higgs bosons act at sub-atomic level and gravity acts at planetary level.