Energy

It is not that I my knowledge does not drop of in various areas but that does not make me any less learned. That also does not make me unfit to speculate as if my speculation is somehow inferior or uninformed.

I take it by your lack of an answer that you would be swimming in music programming in general.

I do use a microphone quite well even thought I may only know a cursory idea of how electrons are converted from an electrical current to acoustic energy on the other site of the PA speaker.

Quote:

It is not that I my knowledge does not drop of in various areas but that does not make me any less learned. That also does not make me unfit to speculate as if my speculation is somehow inferior or uninformed.

I take it by your lack of an answer that you would be swimming in music programming in general.

I do use a microphone quite well even thought I may only know a cursory idea of how electrons are converted from an electrical current to acoustic energy on the other site of the PA speaker.

You abilities to used equipments that others had design have no relationship to your knowing what the hell you are talking about.

The analogy that come to mind is a woman driver who is very good at driving her car however she have zero knowledge of the car workings and can not by herself deal with the simplest problems.

Now any comments she might decide to make concerning the design of the power plants of cars would therefore be worthless.

Because of your almost complete lack of knowledge your comments are once more worthless noise.

All you are doing is making a fool of yourself to anyone with any background in science.

The problem with science is it cannot predict. The moment it begins to predict it ceases to be science. Thus science cannot know the consequences of its actions until after the fact. After something is adversely affected by science then science measures the outcome and says, yup, this thing or that is harmful to the planet and/or humanity.

When science begins to predict beyond its own scope then it becomes divorced from its own precepts.

How can we trust science to be purveyors of human destiny when it is blind to anything immeasurable?

A very remarkable concentration of truly meaningless blather.

RexRed wrote:

The problem with science is it cannot predict. The moment it begins to predict it ceases to be science. Thus science cannot know the consequences of its actions until after the fact. After something is adversely affected by science then science measures the outcome and says, yup, this thing or that is harmful to the planet and/or humanity.

When science begins to predict beyond its own scope then it becomes divorced from its own precepts.

How can we trust science to be purveyors of human destiny when it is blind to anything immeasurable?

A very remarkable concentration of truly meaningless blather.

The is a wall where science leaves off and speculation and prediction begins...

I think of science as a sphere and outside of that sphere is not just pseudo science, but thinkers speculate and predict the immeasurable effects that science imposes upon society and the world. Will science save us or bury us? Does science itself know this answer? No...

Quote:

The is a wall where science leaves off and speculation and prediction begins...

I think of science as a sphere and outside of that sphere is not just pseudo science, but thinkers speculate and predict the immeasurable effects that science imposes upon society and the world. Will science save us or bury us? Does science itself know this answer? No...

It would be nice if you even knew the meaning of the word science but even that is asking too must of you it would seem.

No. Dark matter and energy can be measured (in terms of their spatial & gravitational effects) but they cannot be detected by conventional methods such as visual observation or their effects on electrical or magnetic fields. There is a difference.