reply to post by 1Agnostic1
1. I'm not quite sure what this false paradox is intended to prove.
2. It is usually used as an argument against formal logic!
1.It still is a paradox since no one has given a satisfying mathematical solution. And, before to say « yes, it has », remember that an
equivalence isn’t an equality. (1/2+1/4+1/8...1/n is EQUIVALENT to 1. It, in no way, EQUALS 1.)
Still, this paradox proves that mathematics don’t describe reality at all since if, as it is mathematically valid, distance could indeed be divided
ad infinitum no movement could exist. REALITY COULDN’T EXIST.
Can you understand that?
I have the true answer to this paradox btw. Can you come up with any?
2.
Sure, they can’t come up with a decent/sound (mathematical) solution so, instead of reevaluating their belief, they blame it on formal logic and
declare it to be false and change it.
This is beyond ludicrous.
I’ll give you a hint. As crazy as it sounds, the solution to this
seemingly mathematical paradox (it’s a metaphysical one in fact. One
level higher than maths) is NOT mathematical.
If you can’t find the solution with that…
Others consider formal logic to be a subset of mathematics.
Sure, and we see why they’d like that, don’t we?
BUT this cannot be. Language cannot preside over cognition. We don't learn anything from language. We use language to express ideas and concepts that
are formed mentally beforehand.
That’s why I speak of cognitive value too.
Yet, mathematicians don't do that. They, sometimes, write grammatically correct (valid) sentences (equations) and hope they'll have a meaning one day.
Or, worse, try to create a conception of reality that conforms to these equations.
Do you understand how stupid and preposterous it is??
It’s like writing « Walls dream of cars » and, because it’s grammatically valid, accept it, ipso facto, as sound/true.
And then, philosophers should try to create an interpretation of reality where this sentence makes sense.
The fact is that mathematics are an obscure language for many (almost everyone at a certain level). That’s why/how mathematicians and scientists get
away with this stupid way to operate. People don’t realize what’s happening. They blindly trust scientists and science.
But the fun begins when they start to put these concepts into intelligible words and meaningful sentences.
The problem is not that QM is about abstract mathematical concepts too difficult for people to understand.
The problem is that they are just that: (meaningless unsound) abstract concepts that have NO basis in Reality (the physical world).
But we must accept them as real simply because they are (mathematically) valid?? Certainly not!
They have it all cornered though, they use mathematical equations based on the theory they developed, change the rules of Logic to validate their
concepts and MAKE them sound and, then, they interpret the results of experiments in a way that doesn’t contradict or challenge the theory (no
matter, that to be able to do that they have to come up with more and more stupid concepts that, in turn influence other interpretations on reality).
Alternative theories simply cannot « win »!
That’s why I say an entirely new paradigm must be created. Or, more likely, we simply must get rid of QM concepts and go back to true Logic.
Probabilities and stats could still be used but BY DEFAULT, knowing they are a 'lesser evil’, NOT the ONLY way to apprehend Reality… Until we come
up with a truly causal, deterministic and predictive alternative.
The actual paradigm (and dogmas) doesn’t even ALLOW the pursuit of these alternatives since reality is declared a-causal (non-deterministic) BY
NATURE!
But experiments have shown that the ether does not exist. It seems that the laziness is on the part of people who cannot master the mental
gymnastics necessary to comprehend QT.
Not being able to detect interactions doesn't mean there are none. Again, beside logic, there are phenomena/experiments that indirectly imply/prove
the existence of the Ether. The double slit experiment being one. In fact, any experiment putting in evidence a wave phenomenon also is.
Also, as developed in my previous point/paragraph, QT doesn't require simply some "mental gymnastics" but to abandon logic and rationality
altogether.
The problem here is that your understanding of logic is about two millennia out of date
This is a choice and I would say more like 100 years... Since science has been hijacked by mystics like Bohr and Pauli.
edit on 14-1-2013 by 1Agnostic1 because: edit