Mon 8 Mar, 2021 08:28 pm
The scientific method, using fallible mankind to dictate what is legitimately experienced, by way of momentum-tactics, is absolutely no different than forcing a group of children to say what we want them to. I know that sounds harsh, and I am sorry, but this needs aired out.
Our very Psychology admits to the fact that we all lie to ourselves. We see, hear, and feel, lies, all the time. To build statistics upon the momentum of agreement, only proves the amount of force coming against the opposition.
But, how far does this flaw in our science go?
Can one simply defy gravity because one has built up more momentum of belief which stands contrary to the mass agreements? The "hive mind", if you will?
Is it merely belief that separates us and confines us in prisons we ought not to be in?
If so, and I do believe this is evident, then what is the recourse? All cannot simply "do as thou wilt", and maintain any bit of order. Then again, whose order? And here we have "community", and even "societies", to question the legitimacy of?
Madness! Some will say. Yet most agree that we are not deserving of Reality and/or Truth.
But I see no need to maintain lies believed for the sake of a society that is destined to kill us all.
Force requires potential energy, to become more forceful.
Take away the PE, and the forceful get hostile, because they are destined to die.
We experience what we believe, and nothing more.
This understanding can awaken some books, and some philosophers.
Where did life come from?
Because Truth just IS. Self-existent. Eternal.
All that opposes the Truth, admittedly, is a lie.
Therefore, we have been living out the lie of lies.
And calling it Science.
You have the science all wrong.
1. Science is based on testable experiment. The results are what they are. It has nothing to do with forcing anyone to do anything.
2. Since Science is based on testable experiment, it has nothing to do with hive mind or agreement. What is scientifically correct is based on the measurements from the experiment.
3. The phrase "force requires potential energy" is nonsense (from the perspective of a Physics teacher). It isn't true and it doesn't mean anything. You can have force without Potential energy and you can have potential energy without force. If you are going to use scientific terms, you make a little effort to make sure you understand them first (these terms are not difficult).
4. Science has no concept of "truth". Truth is a philosophical term.
Science is measuring the way the universe actually behaves. In science we study it, then we measure it. And it is what it is.
Philosophy is concerned how the universe should behave.
What is "testable data", if not sensory?
Everyone in the world is concerned with how things ought to behave. I'm no different, in that aspect. So by your definition, a "scientist" is merely an average person.
The phrase "force requires potential energy" is nonsense (from the perspective of a Physics teacher).
Really now?? So strength matters not in baseball or football, or golf, or rocket propulsion for that matter??
Force, I will define as the amount of energy put into an object to cause motion.
PE, I define as anything that adds energy to that force, to maintain it or grow stronger.
We are talking basic laws of motion here.
I don't understand why the need for the harshness, but it's typical when someone is defending core agreements being threatened. "Trauma-response".
And now Truth is a philosophical term, eh?
I have made a case for the difference between facts and Truth, but I don't see you taking the time to read it.
The courts don't seem to think Truth is a philosophical term. Try that. I'd like to see how that works out for ya.
Force (in Physics) is a measurable quantity. Energy is a different measurable quantity.
If everyone makes up their own definition for these terms, the terms won't be useful in science. I can explain an experiment that you can do where you add force without adding any additional energy. I can also explain an experiment where you can add potential energy without adding any additional force.
You are using the word "physics" to talk about something that has nothing to do with actual Physics (as is learned in a University or used to send robots to Mars).
There is a real Physics and a correct way to do Physics. If you don't use the word Physics... then I won't be so adamant.
You are making an anti-science argument.