[davidgow77]

And whats fore folks.... there is a damn foxy chick starring in it....

Its called "What the Bleep do We know?" and is part documentary with real scientists and a story line about infra-dimensional travel (or something like that).... anyway.... check it out at http://www.thebleep.co.uk



DG

[subversion]

thanks DG, looks like a pretty cool flik

[dleviwing]

I rented the movie when it first came out. It would appear those who produced it didn't know much of anything practical about QM. This type of media presentation promotes the SiFi factor of QM, not the real practical applications and its real value. This is why some people are wowed by scientist and others believe scientist are intellectual morons.
The movie really sucked for the real science of QM.

[davidgow77]

Fair enough.... but it seems to me that it is highlighting that the notion of QM is in direct contrast to the principles of "probabilities" within QED and QCD. You can't actually have a system of mechanics where "probabilties" are concerned because mechanics works on absolutes and specifics. The Heisenberg Uncertainty principle, within this context, dictates that you CANNOT have mechanical analysis where the systems analysed are based upon probability... is is a contradiction in terms. QM must therefore be a generalisation of rules relating to QED and QCD.



DG

[dleviwing]

Hi David;
What is so mysterious about statistical mathematics of probability and uncertainty? Our ability to perform measurements at the microcosm level is limited by our instruments and methods. Repeated measurements provide data of probability. Uncertainty simply states the limits of accuracy we can expect to achieve. Some people seem to make an exaggerated big deal of simple mathematical techniques just as they do with Relativity to infer the possibility of time travel. I personally consider this type of hype of science as "scientific porn", it lures you into science with the promise of exciting mysteries. It's quite disappointing when you find out science can't live up to this type of hype.

I do however, find many areas of research quite exciting and interesting. I wish these producers would make movies of these areas of research and leave the SiFi for the SiFi writers.

[davidgow77]

Yes... but you have to accept that the limitations on statistical measurement and our interpretation of mechanics may be limited by the limits of our own brains to perceive anything smaller than in units of planck length or planck time. Smaller units could possibly exists, but if the human brain cannot probe further than this, then the science of QM defacto reaches its limits of use, and probabilities (non-absolutes in Mechanics) form the basis of the governing dynamic for the system. Science isn't about being 100% rigourous only when you can explain everything.... it must, by virtue, push the borders into the unexplained and the unknown... even if this means lacing ideas together in films to get people thinking more. Science needs both rational methodologists and creative people otherwise we get stuck in the doldrums of not being able to make any new leaps forward. While I am more interested in the philosophy of science, and I can see you are more of a true scientist with a better concept scientific rigour, I think that scientific rigour never allows you to make leaps in understandings, but rather hinders creativity in problem solving. I am purely interested in problem solving through philosophical analysis, and the film appelas to me because it is not constrained by notions of what is and what isn't "correct" science.



DG

[dleviwing]

Hi Dave;
I don't think creativity comes from false knowledge and illusions; religion is the only product of this type of philosophy. The creativity that produced flight, space travel, satellite communications, television, lasers, computers, and all our technical marvels in medicine, did not come from a religious form of science. I have never met a scientist that was not a creative thinker. I don't think knowing the difference between false knowledge and reality limit one's creativity, it only eliminates the need to perform ridiculous science like trying to make a time machine or creating a worm hole. If Edison had been a scientist, he would not have perform thousands of experiments to create an electric light bulb; he would have known the properties of a vacuum and used this knowledge.

I think the philosophy needed by science is a new paradigm of reality that provides better hypothesis of what are the real fundamentals of reality. Non-scientific people tend to interpret the word "dimension" as meaning some extension to our spatial concepts. Dimension simply means a measured phenomena. When scientist add dimensions to their theories, they are referring to a mathematical term of measurement not another extension to reality as implied by the hype promoters.

If you are attempting to create a philosophy that will help define a TOE, I don't believe it will be found through the misinterpretation of science terminology.

If your interest is in discussion and debate; I'm afraid time has removed that phase of my life, but my creativity has never been better. You and Guille do bring back many fond memories of moments at the local pub engrossed in these types of debate. It was fun so enjoy it while you still can.

Best regards;
Dave Wing

PS. Your paper on Gravity was well written so I think you are a bit more than a philosopher.

[Robert]

Bartender Robert walks over to the table where three gentlemen are sitting and discussing some movie about a hot chick. With a look of frustration Robert holds up a poster for the three men to see, points at it, and says, "You guys are not following the Rules of the Pub. I will try to fix things, but you guys need to follow the rules. I don't want to have to take away your drinking privileges". Bartender Robert walks away shaking his head and hangs the Rules of the Pub poster next to the door for others to see upon entry.

[subversion]

Originally Posted by dleviwing Hi Dave; I don't think knowing the difference between false knowledge and reality limit one's creativity, it only eliminates the need to perform ridiculous science like trying to make a time machine or creating a worm hole.

Subversion takes a drink from his frosty mug and looks over at dleviwing with a question which the mind must answer. "Why is it that making time machines is ridiculous? Is there something in science that strictly forbids traveling to the past? Is it possible that flight was also viewed as a ridiculous notion at some point?" He sets down the mug and realizes that creative thinking comes with the business.

[dleviwing]

After the friendly bartender reminded Dave where he was, he apologized then smiled and said "in that case, I'll have a VO&7."
Turning to his young friend Dave replied,
"I can remember the past and have had dreams of the future".
"I can look up at the night sky and see the stars as they were billions of years ago".
"I regret to say, time is not an entity to move forward and back like the setting of a clock and we must live each instant as it happens."
"Magic is wonderful for entertainment, but it dose not help feed the hungry or cure the dying".
"Your time is your own my young friend; use it as you will".
"Waste it if you must, and regret it, you will".
As Dave walked to the door he turned and smiled at sub and the bartender; with a look of regret he said: "If you wish to be happy, don't look for truth, only disappointment lies on that path, even when truth is found."