I am trying to understand IT and create a philosophical theory of everything. I am starting with quantum mechanics, and cosmology(not to be confused with cosmetology). The largest and the smallest.
In astrophysics, dark matter is matter that does not emit or reflect enough electromagnetic radiation (such as light, X-rays and so on) to be detected directly, but whose presence may be inferred from its gravitational effects on visible matter.* This makes perfect sense to me. Any rational person would say so. Physicist theorize that certain phenomenon, like dark matter, quarks, strings,etc exist because they can see evidence of their existence. It is interesting because I infer the existence of an awesome divine presence because of the evidence I see of its existence. They have data and I have mystery.
The deepest problem in theoretical physics is harmonizing the theory of general relativity which describes gravitation and applies to large-scale structures (stars, galaxies, super clusters), with quantum mechanics which describes the other three fundamental forces acting on the microscopic scale.* ( I think they mean the strong and weak forces (these are the nuclear forces. The strong force holds the quarks together. The weak force is about nuclear decay), and electromagnetism.) This is all I know now but I think I know this. Who knows. thanks for listening.
The four forces or interaction that we know about are, in the order of the most powerful to the least: The Strong force, Electromagnetism, the weak force and gravitation. Actually, it may be: gravitation and then the weak force. No I think I am right.
*Wikipedia
In astrophysics, dark matter is matter that does not emit or reflect enough electromagnetic radiation (such as light, X-rays and so on) to be detected directly, but whose presence may be inferred from its gravitational effects on visible matter.* This makes perfect sense to me. Any rational person would say so. Physicist theorize that certain phenomenon, like dark matter, quarks, strings,etc exist because they can see evidence of their existence. It is interesting because I infer the existence of an awesome divine presence because of the evidence I see of its existence. They have data and I have mystery.
The deepest problem in theoretical physics is harmonizing the theory of general relativity which describes gravitation and applies to large-scale structures (stars, galaxies, super clusters), with quantum mechanics which describes the other three fundamental forces acting on the microscopic scale.* ( I think they mean the strong and weak forces (these are the nuclear forces. The strong force holds the quarks together. The weak force is about nuclear decay), and electromagnetism.) This is all I know now but I think I know this. Who knows. thanks for listening.
The four forces or interaction that we know about are, in the order of the most powerful to the least: The Strong force, Electromagnetism, the weak force and gravitation. Actually, it may be: gravitation and then the weak force. No I think I am right.
*Wikipedia
posted by Anne Coe | 7:33 AM
4 Comments:
I think that we need a theory that links the sciences together, as they still do not operate in concert, so to speak. The only existing theory to explain all is provided by religions, who offer God as the one who creates and maintains. I am not sure that science has all the keys yet to the puzzle.
Mike Tinter
Roman Catholicism's Christoph Cardinal Schönborn has dubbed the most fervent of faith-challenging scientists followers of "scientism" or "evolutionism," since they hope science, beyond being a measure, can replace religion as a worldview and a touchstone.
God vs Science, Time, Nov 13
I want to make a very specific point here - so please listen carefully. It jumped out of me from the above para. and I don't think it's being clearly made in the Science vs Religion wars. (But please correct me).
Science does not constitute a WORLDVIEW - a picture of "it all" and the total story of "it all" - that is to say, the universe (and perhaps all universes), and the earth and life, and especially human beings and our place within it all. Cosmology/ astronomy and evolutionary science and all the other sciences do not add up to a picture of "it all." They are only pieces of the whole picture. Or rather, they are not being added up. For that to happen, there would have to be still another branch of science that surveys all the other sciences, and brings all their findings together - a Universal Science, if you like. Dawkins is informally working in such a superfield in The God Delusion but very informally and with little scientific humility or self-awareness. Otherwise, he would appreciate that you can accept a totally materialistic, evolutionary picture of the world, consistent with science, and STILL believe in, or recognize the possibility of, God.
Religions do constitute worldviews. Somewhat ridiculous worldviews overall. (Arguably you cannot believe in any of their particular attempts at defining God and still believe in science). But they do give a picture, however imperfect and limited, of "it all," and our place within it all. They are in the worldview business, science isn't - not yet, anyway - and should always remember that.
But shouldn't science be in the "world view" business? I have always thought so but I come from such a liberal arts background that perhaps it is impossible for me to think like a scientist. Maybe that is what we need in order to get the Super, super field theory of everything. A scientist that can think like a poet or visa versa. I have always felt that originally we were all after the same thing, answers and some power over nature, and like Neanderthal and humans we diverged someplace along our social evolutionary journey. And science became what it is and poetry what it is and now ner' the twain will meet.
i don't think this can be resolved with logic. Something bigger than anything science has been able to fully resolve is going on here. I don't think it's religion unless it's the "blind faith" part of what is there but we can't describe it yet. Much like looking at a painting. Because it's viewed through the filter of the experience and perspective of the viewer it may not even represent what the artist believes s-he put on canvas. I can almost understand quantum physicist Fred Wolf when he talks about it (See film: "What the Bleep Do We Know?), but in the end (of the evening) the inability to resolve the situation makes me so crazy and frustrated that I require a session of passionate sex to take my mind off the subject.
Post a Comment
<< Home