Missing my Friends on Dalnet Philosophy (a rant toward linford86 )
So linford86 you moved my post from philosophy even discussing the physicist in question? You know then what philosophy is? And what rule did I break as you asked me to obey them other than the moderator is always right? For me (at least) there was no method of appeal. Let this post of yours stand for all time despite the caveat you are but a theoretical physicist in training. It speaks for itself. It reflects the quality of our universities and our new generation of scientists with such attitudes. How can you not see legitimate questions of physics as well as philosophy involving ideas of grounding in uncertainty and the deeper nature of causation? For that matter I do not think you understand the depth of concerns on our theories of measurement. The parrot is intelligent but only learns to speak what it hears.
* * * Quote:
owleye, I am indeed interested in explanations. I am not a pragmatist nor am I an engineer who simply doesn't care where the equations come from. I've derived many of them myself, and I understand the mathematical structure behind them on a level that I suspect you do not. I am, after all, a theoretical physicist (at least in training.) However, my point was that we mustn't force an explanation onto nature nor should we make statements in science that are beyond our abilities to measure. Such statements -- if they are made at all -- properly belong to philosophy.
Re: speed of light
Postby linford86 on June 3rd, 2010, 12:53 pm
Theoretical Physicist in Training:
http://www.philosophychatforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=39&p=154144#p154144
No comments:
Post a Comment