It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
usertwelve
reply to post by AfterInfinity
Hmm. Okay. So if I "imagine" a law from observations
...
Are those results and observations a result of a force originating from inside my head? Or their heads?
The law will always be imaginary. The observed behavior that the law describes is very real.
usertwelve
reply to post by AfterInfinity
Okay. Let's take the number one.
Where did the number one come from?
This is exactly what modern physicists are postulating. Pretty cool you came to the same conclusion.
So in the end, there wouldn't be a universe. It would explode, run out of fuel, and return to being a dense knot of particles. Rinse and repeat.
The billion dollar question.
So how do you think the universe has managed to preserve itself, in spite of being naturally chaotic, as you suggest?
Sorry I must have missed them. Can you point them out to me?
I already did
I am by no means attempting to be uncivil. I apologize if I gave that impression.
If you're not going to be civil
bastion
usertwelve
reply to post by AfterInfinity
Okay. Let's take the number one.
Where did the number one come from?
Real/Natural numbers were invented, complex and irrational numbers were discovered.
These laws of physics can change as new information emerges
Very real indeed. They also are not laws.
So is the color red imaginary as well? Maybe the C note on a piano or a guitar? Those vibrations are imaginary?
neoholographic
reply to post by usertwelve
There's no need to enforce, govern or control laws that can't be broken.
usertwelve
reply to post by neoholographic
These laws of physics can change as new information emerges
Didn't you saw these laws were unbreakable? Behavior changes.
Real/Natural numbers were invented, complex and irrational numbers were discovered. Though these are very tricky areas f maths even great mathematicians struggle to comprehend.
usertwelve
reply to post by bastion
Sorry I must have missed them. Can you point them out to me?
I already did
neoholographic
reply to post by AfterInfinity
That's a good point.
For some reason he keeps acting like scientific law is just like a political law that says stop at a red light. The reason why you need police to enforce the law to stop at a red light is because it can be broken.
neoholographic
usertwelve
reply to post by neoholographic
These laws of physics can change as new information emerges
Didn't you saw these laws were unbreakable? Behavior changes.
What???
I have been saying that these laws can change as new information emerges because we're still discovering the laws of physics. You do know that gravity existed before Newton or the photoelectric effect existed before Einstein? They just discovered these things through mathematics.
There's no need to enforce, govern or control laws that can't be broken.
bastion
reply to post by usertwelve
No because I gave the reason earlier - science uses specific terminology for a reason, too keep it consistent and accurate. I therefore cannot translate the words into layman's terms without cheating you by converting it into a non scientific statement. The only way to understand it is to learn scientific language and the reasoning behind it - the book I posted earlier contains all that.