It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

Credible Scientists Devise Mathematic Theory Leading to Panspermia - Pockets of Life Prevail

page: 3
19
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 05:53 AM

What I mean is, that in so far as a model which describes the universe in mathematical formula is based on known values

Yes I understand what you are saying. I am just saying that mathematics is the very foundation of everything. I tend to look at it as Platonism.

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 05:55 AM

And yet science need mathematics to explain.

No. No. And no.
Mathematics does not explain anything but it can model some things. Some aspects of the world.

Mathematics tells us how gravity behaves. It does not explain it. Math provides no explanation of how mass does what it does to spacetime.

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 05:59 AM

Mathematics does not explain anything but it can model some things. Some aspects of the world.

So it is possible that 2 + 2 = 5?

Mathematics tells us how gravity behaves. It does not explain it. Math provides no explanation of how mass does what it does to spacetime.

Not sure you understand my point? Science is based on mathematics yes? It's the reality. It's there.

I am sure you have studied quantum physics and subatomic particles. They follow the math? Yes?
edit on 9/9/2015 by Deaf Alien because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 06:02 AM

So it is possible that 2 + 2 = 5?

In this Universe, this reality. Probably not.

Science base on mathematics yes? It's the reality. It's there.
Science uses mathematics as a tool. Science is based on observation.

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 06:05 AM

Science uses mathematics as a tool. Science is based on observation.

Right. I am talking about the underlying reality. And yes science is based on observation. What I am talking about is the underlying reality.

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 06:09 AM
Never mind. It's going too far off the topic. Just stating that life will happen eventually. How? Don't matter.

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 06:15 AM

www.scientificamerican.com...

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 06:22 AM

Mathematics can describe an observed reality, but it cannot explain how that reality came into being.

Observation is the root of scientific thinking, observation and logic. An example follows.

I observe water going down the plughole of my bath. Bath salts and dead skin whirl with the water, as it escapes down the plughole. Gravity, acting on the water, drags it down the hole, and the whirling vortex around it pulls the particulates into a familiar shape. It looks like a spiral arm galaxy.

One can reasonably surmise, suppose, and theorise, that the shape of a spiral arm galaxy is related to a centre of extremely focused gravity, in order for that shape to be replicated on such a vast scale as the smattering of stars we call the Milky Way.

Mathematics cannot imagine such a thing, but a mind which receives and contemplates visual data, can imagine it. At that point, more extensive observations can be performed, and at the same time, if one has the capacity, mathematical formula can be put together which describe the action of the supermassive black hole at the centre of our galaxy, and its effects on the surrounding space, stars, and galactic components besides. But mathematics does not have ideas of its own, it merely provides a shorthand description of what one observes.

ETA:

You said to phage that particle physics follows the mathematics... that is not strictly accurate, and in regard to quantum mechanics, it is said that one who claims to know the extent and breadth of it, is either mad, or lying, such are the twists and turns, and impossible geometries involved with it.

Again, mathematics describes observed realities. It does not provide the framework, but is informed by it. Reality is the glass, and to understand it better, we fill that glass with numbers. The numbers have never been the glass itself, they just help us understand its shape.
edit on 9-9-2015 by TrueBrit because: added detail and explanation.

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 06:29 AM

I observe water going down the plughole of my bath. Bath salts and dead skin whirl with the water, as it escapes down the plughole. Gravity, acting on the water, drags it down the hole, and the whirling vortex around it pulls the particulates into a familiar shape. It looks like a spiral arm galaxy.

Yep all follow mathematics. You observe mathematics in action.

Mathematics cannot imagine such a thing

You said to phage that particle physics follows the mathematics... that is not strictly accurate

Not strictly accurate? How are they able to predict?

No it is already there. Can you imagine 2 + 2 = 5?
edit on 9/9/2015 by Deaf Alien because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 06:31 AM

There was no mathematics, before the first mathematician was born.

The universe predates it by a significant period, therefore, your assertion is in error.

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 06:33 AM

The universe predates it by a significant period, therefore, your assertion is in error.

Ok so 2 + 2 = 5 is possible?

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 06:35 AM

Again, mathematics describes observed realities. It does not provide the framework, but is informed by it.

Yes and what do we observe? Mathematics in action.

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 06:36 AM
BTW JadeStar I apologize. I don't mean to take your thread off topic. I am just saying that life is inevitable no matter what.

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 06:37 AM

Only if 2 can be both 2 and 3 at the same time.

Because I respect science, all I will tell you is that I have never come across a situation in which that was true. That does not mean that there are no situations in which it might be.

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 06:38 AM

Just read the article. I know we are going way off the topic lol. It's hard to explain what I mean since I am deaf. I rather sign it to you in ASL.

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 06:40 AM

I wish I could translate American Sign, but unfortunately I cannot.

Sorry!

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 06:41 AM

That does not mean that there are no situations in which it might be.

I guess its like 1984 or that episode of Star Trek with Captain Picard? It's not 4 it's FIVE!

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 06:44 AM

It's no problem. I just wish I could explain myself better. Read up on Platonic Idealism. I know it's not the same thing but it's close.

I guess my point is that life will exist no matter what.

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 06:55 AM
What a fantastic OP. You go girl! This is fascinating, and I appreciate you bringing it forward.
I was listening to an interview on NPR with one of the Kepler scientists, and he was talking about the Webb Scope coming out (was it 2020?) and how Kepler is expected to survive another few years as well.

It is all so exciting to my physics-impaired mind.

I have a question for ya - in your imagination, what do you think distant life forms might be like?
Maybe dinosaurs on some suitable planets? Or blue-green algae infestations? Or .....???

It's so fun to think about. All the billions and billions of planets out there that might harbor life, and how life on THAT planet might have evolved depending on atmospheric conditions, gravity, water content, etc.

Cool stuff, sister.
Keep up the great work! I'll be proud to be say "Hey, I used to talk to that woman on a forum when she was just 'A girl with a scope and a whole lotta hope'!" The world is lucky to have you among us.

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 07:04 AM

That's a great point you made about the density of the bubble.

One would assume that if the bubble has an origin point at its centre, that the density would not be uniform across the bubble, but be lesser toward its outer edge, than at its core, but to attach a value to that density will require exploration and hard discovery I think.

That said, if the origin point was the location from which life was scattered in that region, perhaps that is wrong, and perhaps the density would be greater toward the outer edge, than at the core where the first seed was dropped? Especially if the propelling force was a solar system shattering event like a sun going nova or something like that.... Hmmm...

Oh I do love a diversion beyond the mundane!
edit on 9-9-2015 by TrueBrit because: Added alternative thought.

top topics

19