Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian W
Ok there seems to be agreement that time is a necessity. No argument from me.
I find it strange that some feel that Philosophy, once known as the 'Queen of Sciences' is now to be excluded from scientific explorations. How will we ever get there from here without the philosophical question to drive the quest?
As for only being able to prove an infinity of causes by being an observer throughout infinity... poppycock! Science has believed for a long time that if you can reproduce the same result under the same conditions as many times as desired you have proven a law. Admittedly there is no iron clad guaranty that it will work every time but after enough consecutive positive results you are justified in believing it will allso occur the next time.
Brian
|
Notice you said believed...that is still not proof of actuality. You cannot prove an infinity of anything. Most, if not all scientific laws and theories breakdown when infinities come into their equations because infinities introduce the concept of no possible beginning or end, which science cannot handle. That's why they have a little thing called renormalisation. It's used to cancel the infinities in equations to make them "sensible" and usable.
If you run an experiment for an infinite number of iterations, you will get all possible outcomes, which means it both will work and won't work an infinite number of times. It will also be a completely ordered and chaotic experiment at the same time. Science (as it stands) completely breaks down because logic itself becomes meaningless. The only thing that makes it sensible is what is doing the observation and the decision it makes as to what it will observe. What this means is that the very presence of the observer creates the reality which is observed.