1
   

Scientific absurdity

 
 
dalehileman
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2017 03:56 pm
@maxdancona,
I se intuition, though limited in its abilities to establish rigorous proofs, as capable of the deepest kinda reason
cameronleon
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2017 05:45 pm
In a practical way:

Intuition: Time flows and dilates.

Scientific fact: Time is a measure, as it is weight, longitude, etc.

0 Replies
 
cameronleon
 
  0  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2017 05:57 pm
@dalehileman,
Quote:
I se intuition, though limited in its abilities to establish rigorous proofs, as capable of the deepest kinda reason


I see the Moon and its circumference, and without any other knowledge but basic geometry I see a sphere. This is a first impression.

Intuition will be increasing in our minds according to our perception of the world. Before we look at the grass and say "it's green" we have learned the name of colors and the difference between them.

At one point, intuition is based in former reasoning which later is applied to new horizons.

The problem with intuition based on perception is mostly the falling in illusions.

And this is a great failure in many aspects of science, when even with calculations and reasoning, their perception of the universe is based on illusions, illusions that scientists were negligent to recognize.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2017 06:33 pm
@maxdancona,
Wrong. Intuition is based on reason. Without reason, there is no decision. It's a choice made subjectively. "I think turning right at the next turn is the right choice." It may be wrong, but it was based on intuition.
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2017 06:51 pm
@cicerone imposter,
You have a different definition of the word "intuition" than I do (or than the dictionary does). Or maybe the problem is the definition of the word "reason". I am not really interested in arguing over the definition of words.

With Science you test every fact with evidence. If the facts or the mathematical logic contradict your beliefs, then you change your beliefs. Often this has lead people to accept scientific facts that contradict what they naturally believe.

When you "go with your gut" without being able to explain the facts or logic you used to reach that decision... that to me is intuition.

I agree with Foofie... humans evolved with the ability to make decisions without really thinking them through. This is a very important skill to have when often any action is better than no actions (for example when you encounter a predator).

However this human trait is often counter-productive in modern life. And, it is the same trait, and the same mental pathways, that make us judge people by the color of their skin.




maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2017 07:04 pm
@maxdancona,
Many principles in science are decidedly counter-intuitive. No one imagined time dilation until Enstein posited it through mathematical reasoning.. he says he was inspired by intuition... and intuition can be a part of creativity... but the problem he was solving was rational. The work that he did was mathematically rigorous and used disciplined logic to meet a set of criteria. And, he wrote a paper that was well-reasoned and mathematically strict.

His ideas were only accepted when they were reviewed and tested... had experiments contradicted his ideas they would have been rejected.

Einstein was also a victim of his own intuition. When he was confronted with the new ideas of Quantum Mechanics, he objected by famously saying "God does not play dice with the Universe".

It turns out Einstein was wrong in this case (God does play dice). In science, when facts experiments and mathematical logic contradict intuition, the facts always win.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2017 07:34 pm
@maxdancona,
Quote:
Intuition is the mechanism by which implicit knowledge is made available during an instance of decision-making.
0 Replies
 
cameronleon
 
  0  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2017 07:55 pm
@maxdancona,
Quote:
No one imagined time dilation until Enstein


Because science is not based on imaginations.

If you think that Einstein's intuition was right, then prove that time exists.

Mathematical calculations are invalid without a fact backing up their amounts.

Like, you can say a^n+b^n=c^n (Fermat's last theorem)

A dude from England said that he solved that equation, and he used methods other than numbers like elliptic curves...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermat%27s_Last_Theorem

Quote:
On 24 October 1994, Wiles submitted two manuscripts, "Modular elliptic curves and Fermat's Last Theorem"[136] and "Ring theoretic properties of certain Hecke algebras",[137] the second of which was co-authored with Taylor and proved that certain conditions were met that were needed to justify the corrected step in the main paper. The two papers were vetted and published as the entirety of the May 1995 issue of the Annals of Mathematics. These papers established the modularity theorem for semistable elliptic curves, the last step in proving Fermat's Last Theorem, 358 years after it was conjectured.


However, if I ask you to solve a^n+b^n+c^n using grains of rice to verify empirically the answer of Wiles, then we know that the whole thing is pure imagination.

Having that Einstein based his theory on one experiment with lots of errors and wrong result (Michelson Morley) and a common belief or conventional idea that time flows, when in reality doesn't even exist, we have the same result as we do with Fermat's last theorem... Relativity is pure fiction, a good entertainment to play with numbers and symbols like crazy, but nothing real from it.

Intuitions does go wrong.

This is highly recognized by psychology that intuition is not always right.

https://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2011/06/14/when-our-intuition-leads-us-to-bad-decisions/

Quote:
Six years ago, Malcolm Gladwell released a book entitled Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking. In his usual style, Gladwell weaves stories in-between descriptions of scientific research the support his hypothesis that our intuition can be surprisingly accurate and right.

One year ago, authors Daniel J. Simons and Christopher F. Chabris, writing in The Chronicle of Higher Education not only had some choice words for Gladwell’s cherry-picking of the research, but also showed how intuition probably only works best in certain situations, where there is no clear science or logical decision-making process to arrive at the “right” answer....

Reasoned analysis, however, works best in virtually every other situation. Which, as it turns out, is most situations where big life decisions come into play.

Gladwell also argues that intuition is not always right....

Intuition is like that — we can’t trust it instinctually, as Gladwell suggests, because it is so often just plain wrong. And we can’t know ahead of time when it’s likely to be wrong in a really, really bad way...

Intuition has its place in the world. But believing it is a reliable cognitive device in most situations that we should trust more often than not is sure to get you into trouble. Relying more often on intuition instead of reasoning is not something that I believe is supported by our current psychological understanding and research.


When I reason and verify the veracity of relativity, the existence of time, the idea that speed will affect time not so the moving body, that light never decelerates, and etc. etc... definitively the intuition of Einstein was completely wrong when confronted with reality.

In science, reasoning wins over intuition based on illusions, as it is the case of the inventor of relativity.


0 Replies
 
dalehileman
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2017 10:25 pm
@maxdancona,
Quote:
If our intuition could tell us how the Universe works, we would have no use for ..... Science.
I disagree inasmuch as science comes to conclusions that Intuition finds impossible
0 Replies
 
dalehileman
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 14 Oct, 2017 01:53 pm
@maxdancona,
Quote:
Science is often counter-intuitive
..but sometimes, Axd, vv
'Tsa pun, Cona, forgive

WebResource.axd is used internally by the Microsoft .NET Framework to retrieve embedded resources

Intuition bein'precisely that
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Oct, 2017 02:01 pm
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

...Intuition is the act of making a decision without facts or reason. This thread is really about science...



This thread is about evolution's giving each side of our brain a different way to process input. The left side of our brain talks to us, and we have consciousness. The right side of our brain develops a conclusion without speech, perhaps based on an algorithm that looks at current input, in context of historical conclusions. All quite scientific for a neuroscientist developing theories on how the brain works. Not scientific perhaps for a high school physics teacher that wants to proselytize the scientific method to a class with students, many of them basing their beliefs on popular notions.

This was just in the last episode of The Big Bang Theory, where Sheldon Cooper was arguing with his fiancee whether neuroscience is a more scientific field than physics. And his spin-off in November, Young Sheldon will likely be a hit too. Was there ever a Young Maxdancona?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 09/17/2021 at 03:52:18