Thread: The End of Science

tl;dr

Of course science isn't just physics, and physics isn't just quantum mechanics. So, unless we someday know everything, science will never end.

Tomorrow maybe I'll read the whole thing and elaborate more.

I'd just like to say a physician is a doctor, not a scientist

Originally Posted by Omnius Deus

I'd just like to say a physician is a doctor, not a scientist

Aye, indeed.

I think Juroara is talking about physicists.

Also, she has little understanding of what Quantum Physics is about.

Science will always be concerned with objective reality, never subjective realities because such things do not exist, neither from a scientific viewpoint nor my own.

There is some validity in saying that science has limits. By many definitions, science is about the empirical, but there is a probably a lot more to reality which can be deduced via pure logic which is not in any way measurable, which is already happening with string theory and such things. At such a point I hesitate to call it science, but rather a mix between mathematics and philosophy, both of which are aspects of and studies of logic which is what I consider to be the ultimate form of reality, the overlord of the three other completely valid realities of the physical, mental, and platonic (of which only the physical is adressed by science)... I suppose metaphysics is the word.

Quantum consciousness is by no way a consensus. In fact it's a minority view by quite a way. Roger Penrose is one of its prime advocates but his claims have been met with many rebuttals, particularly regarding the fact that quantum effects do not actually have much of a bearing at all upon the function of neuron cells as we understand them. Personally I think functionalism is the way forwards. I reckon awareness (I prefer the word awareness as it is pretty much synonymous with my understanding of the word consciousness but less mystical or vague) is the result of a very special circumstances where you have a complex mathematicalal causal network... what exactly it is about the network I am not sure, but I am 95% sure that awareness arises due to what can be seen as the interaction between physical reality and platonic reality. Notice how the concept of causality becomes objective. That is very interesting. The general view is that something makes something else happen because it just does and causality is just an arty way of describing this with no meaning in itself, but what we may think of as the vague causal motions of matter in the brain actually give rise to something which is not vague at all but completely distinct, an objective absolute which either is or isn't there (consciousness). Such absolutes exist nowhere else in physical reality which is why it's so interesting. Only in mathematics do we behold such purity.

quantum physics actually only does not work when applied with relative theory. thats it though, so maybe you should do your homework. This opens a lot of doors for science actually. Science has been proven over god, if the point your trying to make is that science is loosing and god is winning, blah blah blah. But the fact is, is that every church goer out their uses science as a survival instinct, so to say science is irrelevant is the stupidest fucking bullshit have ever heard, and I have heard a lot of bullshit.

quantum physics actually only does not work when applied with relative theory.

Which one. If you mean special then your wrong, because of Richard Feynman and QED and Paul Dirac. If you mean general relativity then you are correct, however theories have been proposed like supersymmetry and string theory.

there are physicians who want to talk about how the 'observer' fits into quantum physics, reality. the reason, the article is against this is because, you can not do that if you first don't study the 'observer'. that is, the physician has to look first in their own mind - at their own ego before they can tell us what reality is.

What the hell has medical practioners got to do with quantum mechanics? Anyway, this is bull.

as science is reaching its end, leaving the realm of objectivity

Sorry, but no. Quantum mechanics is objective, since experiments are objective, since mathematics is objective.

it is for this reason I believe the article proposes that science is ending. and now is the time to build and create a new school thought is entirely about the study and research of consciousness. and this time, unlike 20th century studies of consciousness - with a lot more respect to the mystics that scientists themselves are beginning to listen to.

Science is a method. You make a guess, work out what it means, do the mathematics, then do a experiment. If the experiment is correct you do other experiments. Hence, it will always go on, for example LHC.

Science does not care for respect, it cares for evidence.

I can fix the spelling, jeez

but whats this argument over what I am saying? READ THE ARTICLE TO DISCUSS, IT IS NOT MY WORDS

Originally Posted by bluefinger

Aye, indeed.


Also, she has little understanding of what Quantum Physics is about.

bluefinger, read the article

thats what this thread is about

it has nothing to do with me

wendylove

if you actually READ THE ARTICLE it has nothing against the scientific method, or science for that matter

why do you guys even bother opening your mouths if you don't care at all what this thread is about? please read the article to discuss. there is nothing to discuss until you read the article

Originally Posted by dylanshmai

quantum physics actually only does not work when applied with relative theory. thats it though, so maybe you should do your homework. This opens a lot of doors for science actually. Science has been proven over god, if the point your trying to make is that science is loosing and god is winning, blah blah blah. But the fact is, is that every church goer out their uses science as a survival instinct, so to say science is irrelevant is the stupidest fucking bullshit have ever heard, and I have heard a lot of bullshit.

do all atheists get offensive? that the minute anyone should ever question where science is heading it automatically means they are against science and are supporting some sort of religious doctrine? jeez, you can't even question something scientific without the reason being religion? can't science ever be wrong without religion being involved? just as people question religion and where it has gone, so too must we never stop questioning science - or we have failed ourselves.

I look forward to see science advancing - including the subjective realm

there is nothing about the article, or my post, that says science is irrelevant. my post is about HUMAN BEINGS not recognizing that their own ego can get in the way of interpreting data. information doesn't magically say anything if there is no mind to understand it. the article gives several theories - very wildly different theories - all stemming from the same research. the information didn't magically change. the difference is the human beings looking at the information.

if you read the article it talks about the first definition of science. highlighting that the first definition of science is a subjective human mind looking at objectivity.

I think the article is suggesting, unless we begin to take a deeper look into our own consciousness - we can not advance in science. All too often we forget that science is still a HUMAN PRODUCT. it's not created by nature. we can not forget the human mind creating the science.

read - the - article - before - discussing - or - I - will - just - copy - and - paste - the - whole- damn - thing - ps - my - spelling - has - always - been - bad

A very interesting article. Thanks juroara

I agree that there is an obvious link between consciousness (the observer) and quantum mechanics.

But how are we supposed to study something as subjective as the consciousness in a sensible way...? The scientific method (objective measurements) seems useless in my opinion. Won't we just end up with speculations and philosophic viewpoints...?

I got about a third of the way into the article before finally having to concede that it was mostly going over my head. Sorry.

I agree that there is an obvious link between consciousness (the observer) and quantum mechanics.

lel, going for the old Law of the Minimizing of Mystery are we? The only reason you say that is that quantum physics is weird and consciousness is weird... it doesn't have to be the case that they are two aspects of the same weirdness.

As I just said; neurons are on too large a scale to be affected by quantum activity. The idea has been refuted mathematically.

Originally Posted by Xei

lel, going for the old Law of the Minimizing of Mystery are we? The only reason you say that is that quantum physics is weird and consciousness is weird... it doesn't have to be the case that they are two aspects of the same weirdness.

As I just said; neurons are on too large a scale to be affected by quantum activity. The idea has been refuted mathematically.

I think a lot of the misunderstanding about Quantum Physics has to do with things like the movie What the Bleep do we Know? They have a few short sections that describe in a nutshell some of the more easily grasped and "fun" parts of Quantum Physics, then take those and run into Giant Speculation Land, without warning people that that's where they're heading.

It's fun to speculate, but when you pick only a few principles and ignore the rest, it's best to own up to it.

Oh yeah, that documentary was the biggest pile of nonsense and wee I've ever seen... lots of complaints about it actually, many 'experts' who were uncredited, or statements taken completely out of context to suit the New Age agenda, or often just lies... oh well, such is the way of the world.

That's not to say that quantum consciousness hasn't been seriously considered by some top scientists (I'm currently reading a book by such a scientist, Roger Penrose), but it looks so far to be wrong based on empirical experiments and calculations.