Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Hypothetical—if you were forced to go get a PhD in one of the following science fields, which would it be and why? 1. Physics 2. Chemistry 3. Biology
153 replies
75 recasts
222 reactions
woj ツ
@woj.eth
4. maths bc it's just an endless unproductive nerdsnipe and this is what life is about
3 replies
0 recast
5 reactions
sean
@swabbie.eth
what if math is actually the problem and our current mathematical frameworks are the limiting factor in solving contradictory theories in physics? no single mathematical framework can capture all truths. this can lead us to dead ends of we can't find a new one. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/goedel-incompleteness/
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
navi3
@navi3
This implies that there is a God and a spirit realm. Not all of the world is logically reducible.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
sean
@swabbie.eth
I’m not sure how it implies that, but in terms of logic, logic is a function of neural patterns predictably interpreting stimulation, so if we’re talking about any part of the world that is perceptible (affects one’s nerves & brain), then it follows some logic by definition, even if we haven’t understood it yet
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
𒂠_𒍣𒅀_𒊑
@m-j-r
what are your thoughts about predetermination? imho this follows the same premise.
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
sean
@swabbie.eth
I don't think we can claim to know all inputs to our "system" (yet), but logically we must know that if our "system" can interpret those inputs (as perceptions), at some level they must be measurable because that is what perceiving is by definition. . . .
3 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
navi3
@navi3
We will never be able to claim to know all inputs to the system. It will always end up to modelling that is inherently flawed. That’s why in almost all applied physics, solutions are almost exclusively numerical.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
