Quote:
|
Originally Posted by <<>> I am going to star a new thread on time, in which I will present all my thoughts up to know on time, and all my theories. I do recomend it for you two, for I will include many topics on whcich you are discussing. |
Please do so, I believe very much in your theory of 'mass' being space of energy! (You know it's consistent with expansion of space!)
Also I like very much your idea science not to be absolute truth.
But I believe I emphasized this a bit to much. You know, science is not an absolute lie also of course. So it has to be a relative truth. I think science to have the potential of becoming an absolute truth.
(But now, it's better I think a bit first before I send something.)
You know, I really believe the interpretations of QM we have now are stupid.
(sorry about the word)
The first guy who believed this also and who showed me was Dleviwing.
(Secund person was Q7)
But I have great respect for relativity theory. I believe it's wrong to say relativity is wrong now. (Of course in the futur it won't be completely right also, later scientists will find something better...)
But relativity is logical. (it's created by a genius before anybody could prove it)
With qm, many experiments happened, using mathematics, and a philosophical paradigm. The results we have are a philosophy, which I don't think to be really realistic.
The idea that 'an observer creates his own reality', this I do not believe at all.
(Because I never created my own reality; well me not alone of course...).
The idea that in our world there is something like a mixtured state of two possible realities, I find this not realistic. Because in our world there is only one reality, the one we see.
I also don't believe in non-locality.
I think that philosophy of qm interpretions to be more an urge to create a better philosophy.
I think we should get more realistic, and create a better philosophy, a philosophy of interaction. The only thing I can think to be real in the interpretation of QM is the SUBJECTIVITY. And with 'subjectivity' I don't mean the belief system I send, I mean a more realistic subjectivity caused by interaction between experimentators and the microworld!
Because what really happens is that we influence the microworld by doing experiments with it; this is logical because this world is smaller than ours! We interact with it, I think this is the truth and not that 'the world does not exist when we turn our back to it'.
We don't influence the macroworld because it's bigger than us. (Cause I have never been able to move a star with my mind, and I think even when I would believe I could, then I still couldn't do it...)
I also believe this new philosophy of interaction would have to be combinable with logical theory of relativity. Could bringing both philosophies together to one realistic philosophy lead to better science????
(I'll contact you later guys after a bit of thinking, afterwards I can learn again by you)
See you later.