@GoodScienceForYou You can stop a particle to a halt by cooling it down to 0 kelvin (well as close as you can get anyway), and store it under the right conditions. But that doesnt matter here, even if it wouldnt be possible in practice, that wont change the fact that some particles would have mass when you stopped thewm to a halt, and others wouldnt. Its just a matter of computing the amount of mass they have thanks to the energy f.rom moving, and see if there is a mass beside that.
@mateo3470 Science is comprised entirely of observables. That which cannot be observed falls into some other category. Therefore by most people's definition science can neither prove or disprove the existence of a god. Unless this god is nice enough to appear in a laboratory for study. In which case it is a physical being. Perhaps super powerful, advanced, incredibly smart, but not a 'god'. Therefore Metaphysics is not a science. Its about the observables.
Metaphysics is a mental (brain) operation. In that case, it's observable in the brain. We have come full circle in our understanding, but at some level there are paradoxes to self-understanding. Platonism has perception backwards. God is just a word. I have not seen any agreed-upon definitions. Anyway, definitions never bottom out. When your only tool is a hammer, everything resembles a nail. This is the word "God".
Mathematics is not an essence, but real analysis is a degenerate contradiction. Mathematics is decompositional in nature. This is partly explained with reference to brain lateralization. Upon investigation you will discover that the mathematical term "continuity" is a technical term that gives rise to self-contradiction and is really a degenerate case of discrete analysis. Computers can produce almost any mathematical patterns. They just aren't that creative with new ones.
Don't conjure up the profound. Pay attention to context. The point was that the two things were not sensibly comparable. A use sense of meaning was not accomplished.
@matchbox555 'Math is just a shadow of the physical world', 'Math is not real' . The same can be said of the science of physics, which, did I mention, is actually just applied math. If you cannot state a concept in the language of mathematics it is not physics. It is philosophy. You sound more and more like a philosophy major.
@DeepBlueDJinn no, the physical world is real, and science is the study of physical principles that happen in the real universe. math is just a interpretation of that, a shadow of it. much like a digital instrument cannot replicate a physical instrument.
@CyberFad Sounds like your talking about the fundamental laws of nature. That something exists, or something can be called a "science" are two different things.
@BanGayMarriage Lie. There are MANY places in the Bible shown by science to be FALSE. If you're such a fool as to believe the earth is 8000 years old and the sun revolves around it, that's your choice...but it doesn't make you a Christian, just a fool.
Being a Christian is about treating others with love (your bigotry and hate towards gays disqualifies you instantly) it has NOTHING to do with belief in a literal interpretation of scripture. That doesn't make you a Christian, just dumb.
Do sciences have the property "basic" that you could rank them in order with? Or are they all just derivatives of each other that may not even have a relationship with "basic", or they could be equally far from being "basic"
This might sidestep the question but I think it all arises from Logos. Logic and reason. The ability to discern what is lies at the base of all science. Reasoned discourse is how the world is explored and understood, no matter which direction you go from there.
I suspect that after that, mathematics is the next level up. Measuring and counting and calculation is foundational to so many of the sciences.
I'd say philosophy is the most basic, since it underlies all of the sciences, even psychology and math. The biological facts that enable us to think philosophically aren't the same thing as the SCIENCE of biology, which is the deliberate scientific study of life.
... So if we leave out gravity and radioactivity, what have we got left? Gasoline burning in automobiles, foam and bubbles, the hardness of salt or copper, the stiffness of steel. In fact, biologists are trying to interpret as much as they can about life in terms of chemistry, and as I have already explained, the theory behind chemistry is quantum electrodynamics.”
“I would like to again impress you with the vast range of phenomena that the theory of quantum electrodynamics describes: It’s easier to say it backwards: the theory describes all the phenomena of the physical world except the gravitational effect, the thing that holds you in your seats, and radioactive phenomena, which involve nuclei shifting in their energy levels ...
That's a funny anecdote, I wonder where he got that from? On the issue, I think Feynman summed things up best when he said in 1985 that all of existence, aside from gravitational phenomena and radioactivity, can be explained by the theory of light and matter, i.e. photons and electrons, otherwise known as quantum electrodynamics (next post):
@GoodScienceForYou You can stop a particle to a halt by cooling it down to 0 kelvin (well as close as you can get anyway), and store it under the right conditions. But that doesnt matter here, even if it wouldnt be possible in practice, that wont change the fact that some particles would have mass when you stopped thewm to a halt, and others wouldnt. Its just a matter of computing the amount of mass they have thanks to the energy f.rom moving, and see if there is a mass beside that.
MrRichardQED 5 months ago
What really gets you caught in this hierarchy is anti-realism.
mateo3470 1 year ago
The most "Basic" and fundamental is of course methaphysic.
metal87power 1 year ago
@metal87power
Who's metaphysics?
mateo3470 1 year ago
@mateo3470 Science is comprised entirely of observables. That which cannot be observed falls into some other category. Therefore by most people's definition science can neither prove or disprove the existence of a god. Unless this god is nice enough to appear in a laboratory for study. In which case it is a physical being. Perhaps super powerful, advanced, incredibly smart, but not a 'god'. Therefore Metaphysics is not a science. Its about the observables.
DeepBlueDJinn 11 months ago
@DeepBlueDJinn
Metaphysics is a mental (brain) operation. In that case, it's observable in the brain. We have come full circle in our understanding, but at some level there are paradoxes to self-understanding. Platonism has perception backwards. God is just a word. I have not seen any agreed-upon definitions. Anyway, definitions never bottom out. When your only tool is a hammer, everything resembles a nail. This is the word "God".
mateo3470 11 months ago
the answer is physics
mathematics can not replicate the physical world
this is because mathematics is digital, physics is analog
matchbox555 1 year ago
@matchbox555 mathematics is discrete, mathematics is continuous, computers are digital. Computers are not mathematics.
ProfessorDJINN 1 year ago
Comment removed
mateo3470 1 year ago
Mathematics is not an essence, but real analysis is a degenerate contradiction. Mathematics is decompositional in nature. This is partly explained with reference to brain lateralization. Upon investigation you will discover that the mathematical term "continuity" is a technical term that gives rise to self-contradiction and is really a degenerate case of discrete analysis. Computers can produce almost any mathematical patterns. They just aren't that creative with new ones.
mateo3470 1 year ago
"Computers are not mathematics."
And guacamole isn't love. It's a meaningless statement. Have you used Mathematica before?
mateo3470 1 year ago
@mateo3470
Physics is analog. Now thats a meaningless statement. You sound like a philosophy major.
ProfessorDJINN 1 year ago
@ProfessorDJINN
Don't conjure up the profound. Pay attention to context. The point was that the two things were not sensibly comparable. A use sense of meaning was not accomplished.
mateo3470 1 year ago
@matchbox555 Physics is applied math. If it can't be expressed in the language of mathematics its not physics, its philosophy.
ProfessorDJINN 11 months ago
@ProfessorDJINN math is not real, its just a shadow of the physical world
matchbox555 11 months ago
@matchbox555 'Math is just a shadow of the physical world', 'Math is not real' . The same can be said of the science of physics, which, did I mention, is actually just applied math. If you cannot state a concept in the language of mathematics it is not physics. It is philosophy. You sound more and more like a philosophy major.
DeepBlueDJinn 11 months ago
@DeepBlueDJinn no, the physical world is real, and science is the study of physical principles that happen in the real universe. math is just a interpretation of that, a shadow of it. much like a digital instrument cannot replicate a physical instrument.
matchbox555 11 months ago
Comment removed
CyberFad 11 months ago
@CyberFad Sounds like your talking about the fundamental laws of nature. That something exists, or something can be called a "science" are two different things.
ProfessorDJINN 11 months ago
I am going to say, applied mathematics. I guess its a word game, first define science.
DeepBlueDJinn 1 year ago
The most basic science is THE BIBLE!!!
BanGayMarriage 1 year ago
@BanGayMarriage Lie. There are MANY places in the Bible shown by science to be FALSE. If you're such a fool as to believe the earth is 8000 years old and the sun revolves around it, that's your choice...but it doesn't make you a Christian, just a fool.
Being a Christian is about treating others with love (your bigotry and hate towards gays disqualifies you instantly) it has NOTHING to do with belief in a literal interpretation of scripture. That doesn't make you a Christian, just dumb.
PrisonerNumber9653 1 year ago
Do sciences have the property "basic" that you could rank them in order with? Or are they all just derivatives of each other that may not even have a relationship with "basic", or they could be equally far from being "basic"
downhere85 1 year ago
maybe it's just a stupid question
MrHarald75 1 year ago
This might sidestep the question but I think it all arises from Logos. Logic and reason. The ability to discern what is lies at the base of all science. Reasoned discourse is how the world is explored and understood, no matter which direction you go from there.
I suspect that after that, mathematics is the next level up. Measuring and counting and calculation is foundational to so many of the sciences.
taigakirdape 1 year ago
I'd say philosophy is the most basic, since it underlies all of the sciences, even psychology and math. The biological facts that enable us to think philosophically aren't the same thing as the SCIENCE of biology, which is the deliberate scientific study of life.
XOmniverse 1 year ago
@XOmniverse But philosophy is driven by the dynamic mind
GunsNRosesbitches 1 year ago
... So if we leave out gravity and radioactivity, what have we got left? Gasoline burning in automobiles, foam and bubbles, the hardness of salt or copper, the stiffness of steel. In fact, biologists are trying to interpret as much as they can about life in terms of chemistry, and as I have already explained, the theory behind chemistry is quantum electrodynamics.”
HumanChemistry101 1 year ago
“I would like to again impress you with the vast range of phenomena that the theory of quantum electrodynamics describes: It’s easier to say it backwards: the theory describes all the phenomena of the physical world except the gravitational effect, the thing that holds you in your seats, and radioactive phenomena, which involve nuclei shifting in their energy levels ...
HumanChemistry101 1 year ago
That's a funny anecdote, I wonder where he got that from? On the issue, I think Feynman summed things up best when he said in 1985 that all of existence, aside from gravitational phenomena and radioactivity, can be explained by the theory of light and matter, i.e. photons and electrons, otherwise known as quantum electrodynamics (next post):
HumanChemistry101 1 year ago
Nice
LucienZakhaev 1 year ago