xeni at June 6th, 2014 22:13 — #1
zotlerg at June 6th, 2014 22:32 — #2
Unfortunately humans fit old paradigms into new ideas to seed their fortunes, and use cognitive biases to agree with their peers beliefs. Scientist are not as open minded as people think. Although many mathematic processes are rethought every day, so yay scientists!
But to say theory is based on truth is over stepping the mark a little.
Big Bang? Or just a small explosion in massive rotating galaxy of universes? You decide.
steve_laredo at June 6th, 2014 22:48 — #3
Meh. Math is just our wimpy little way of trying to describe things that we will never really understand. There are no 'universal laws' of anything. That's just scared little animals trying to pretend they understand the cosmos, or that it is somehow control-able.
Smart monkeys...but monkeys nonetheless.
shirley_legitte at June 7th, 2014 00:51 — #4
Huh? If anything, a strictly mathematical interpretation of "The Universe" would yield all the answers…specifically, 42.
willondon at June 7th, 2014 01:45 — #5
Right you are. It's interesting, but the author doesn't seem to understand mathematics as a lens.
I take "Our universe is built out of mathematics." and "The laws of physics are written in mathematics, and they cannot be broken." in the context of: "Humans have been [...] using mathematics [...] because it's the only thing that can accurately describe what happens around us."
So, the universe is made only of things that we can see, because the visible are the only things that we can really see.
phasmafelis at June 7th, 2014 05:27 — #6
Maybe, but you're also a scared monkey, so I don't see any reason to take your word in particular.
peemlives at June 7th, 2014 09:33 — #7
I know this will sound crazy, but I actually believe in prime numbers and power series and things like that. The map is not the territory but some coastlines are very resistant to erosion.
gaston_salazar_ at June 7th, 2014 10:12 — #8
Don't confuse descriptions with phenomena. We use mathematics to describe quantitative phenomena because is a good language for that task.
P.S. A physical law is just a relation that is general, constant and causal, and it works under certain assumptions. The test of a physical law is that we can use it to do predictions; that's why we can build bridges or use a GPS.
danegeld at June 7th, 2014 16:56 — #9
The universe doesn't believe in anything. Saying it believes in encryption is wooly thinking.
nathanrudy at June 7th, 2014 17:18 — #10
Continuing the discussion from The Universe Believes in Encryption:
It would be just as reasonable for someone who knows and has heard only English to say that the world around them is built in English, because that is how we describe it.
The universe, existence, is discrete from language. Math is simply how we describe it, and not an innate component.
danegeld at June 8th, 2014 05:11 — #11
The Universe believes in Warrentless Wiretapping
... every object in the Universe produces gravity, which the laws of physics communicate to every other point in space, at the speed of light. The EFF report that "there is no way to screen or hide your gravity field from interception, in clear violation of your Fourth Amendment rights. Americans anywhere in the world, and all people in the territory of the United States must assert their rights to refuse groundless and intrusive government gravitation"
Open Rights Activist Carl Malamud points out "We're all governed by the laws of Physics, but to date we don't even fully know these secret laws. The laws of Physics are not yet written down in entirety and are often hidden behind the paywalls of so-called scientific journals or published in copyrighted books. The description of these laws frequently incorporates by reference scientific apparatus that is unaffordable to the average citizen."
"Furthermore, the laws of General Relativity may be intrinsically inconsistent with the laws of Quantum Mechanics, creating ambiguity and providing endless employment for so-called experts to debate how these laws should apply in specific cases."
ldobe at June 8th, 2014 05:30 — #12
I'd first laugh, then feel sad, if I had no familiarity with the current state of experimental physics.
The thing is: I know for at least the next probably ten years (but mosre likely the next 20 years) Physicists won't be able to directly detect gravitational waves at all. And even if they do, it will be barely detecting two nearby supermassive black holes merging in the most energetic event ever seen by humanity.
Gravitational waves generated by individual human activities within a two-hundred mile band centered at sea-level won't be detectable for a thousand years.
As much as I wish the singularity will come and make me immortal, I can see that it's most likely we'll all be dead before that happens in this universe.
I realized that the post I'm replying to is satirical after posting my reply. I'm leaving my own post up because I believe it's likely to be true and accurate in its content, regardless of the affect expressed in the OP.
danegeld at June 8th, 2014 05:39 — #13
I'm moderately hopeful that we will see some progress on gravity detectors (accelerometers and gradiometers) based on matter wave interferometry and Compton clocks, that can detect the missing mass of a tunnel underground in Afghanistan, and also orbiting neutrino counters that can see the un-screenable neutrinos leaking out of Iran and North Korea's hidden underground nuclear reactors (and also our nuclear submarines, and Israelis hidden underground reactors, but we'll redact those bits)
ugh at June 8th, 2014 13:03 — #14
Didn't Gödel break math some 80 years ago?
I do love when otherwise-secular folks declare that the Universe is fundamentally mathemagical. I find it humorous, when some people profess allegiance to an empirical epistemology, yet write with certainty about matters which cannot be empirically verified.
Regardless, the article presents an interesting perspective.
dug at June 9th, 2014 02:42 — #15
Do you really believe what you are saying?
And are you part of the universe?
xeni at June 11th, 2014 22:13 — #16
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.