Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Do electrons exits?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Maxwell511" data-source="post: 56632331" data-attributes="member: 114337"><p>Back when I was an undergraduate we used cathode ray tubes to measure the charge and mass of an electron. </p><p></p><p>I am not against the idea that those ideas are the "final" explanation of reality. </p><p></p><p>Honestly my viva is next Friday (my supervisor tells me that it will go well <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite234" alt=":thumbsup:" title="Thumbs Up :thumbsup:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":thumbsup:" />) and my thesis was on how scientific modeling of systems creates "a reality" of the behavior of systems in the way that it is tested. Please wish me luck. </p><p></p><p>When you were younger and finished your doctorate did you not think that maybe this is applicable to other things? "Not real" modeling artifacts that predict accurate results of experiment were par for the course in my research. I am just wondering how far that idea works for other areas of scientific research. </p><p></p><p>As I said to Wiccan_Child, I try to study scientists in a scientific manner. I am not disagreeing that electrons don't exist, I am just asking for some data on why scientists agree that they are real. Basically what is the data. Most importantly who gave that data to you and what is your level of respect to that person. </p><p></p><p>English is a primitive form of mathematics. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>Mathematical ideas are necessary for understanding. As I see it mathematics and logic are the language of the universe. However it is a ridiculous position in my opinion to assume that we currently have the mathematical "language" to explain the workings of the universe. </p><p></p><p>The majority of systems within the universe are known to be non-linear. The majority of our most advanced mathematical knowledge is based on linear reasoning and the resulting superposition. </p><p></p><p>If maths is the language of the universe and humanity is its baby we are at the point of pointing at things and saying "Mah" excitedly. And we get really excited about are ability to point and say "Mah". </p><p> </p><p>In order for humans to test a hypothesis, humans must reason on how to do so. All tests of a hypothesis are the result of human reasoning and are more than likely flawed do to intersubjective opinion. </p><p></p><p>Every scientific test of a hypothesis is not an objective test of it. It is an intersubjective test based on human reasoning.</p><p> </p><p>That is your human opinion. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite7" alt=":p" title="Stick Out Tongue :p" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":p" /></p><p></p><p>I am of the opinion that external tests cannot exist and that all data is a subjective interpretation of reality. That scientific consensus is an intersubjective interpretation of reality that can asymptotically create "fake models" that represent reality.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Maxwell511, post: 56632331, member: 114337"] Back when I was an undergraduate we used cathode ray tubes to measure the charge and mass of an electron. I am not against the idea that those ideas are the "final" explanation of reality. Honestly my viva is next Friday (my supervisor tells me that it will go well :thumbsup:) and my thesis was on how scientific modeling of systems creates "a reality" of the behavior of systems in the way that it is tested. Please wish me luck. When you were younger and finished your doctorate did you not think that maybe this is applicable to other things? "Not real" modeling artifacts that predict accurate results of experiment were par for the course in my research. I am just wondering how far that idea works for other areas of scientific research. As I said to Wiccan_Child, I try to study scientists in a scientific manner. I am not disagreeing that electrons don't exist, I am just asking for some data on why scientists agree that they are real. Basically what is the data. Most importantly who gave that data to you and what is your level of respect to that person. English is a primitive form of mathematics. :) Mathematical ideas are necessary for understanding. As I see it mathematics and logic are the language of the universe. However it is a ridiculous position in my opinion to assume that we currently have the mathematical "language" to explain the workings of the universe. The majority of systems within the universe are known to be non-linear. The majority of our most advanced mathematical knowledge is based on linear reasoning and the resulting superposition. If maths is the language of the universe and humanity is its baby we are at the point of pointing at things and saying "Mah" excitedly. And we get really excited about are ability to point and say "Mah". In order for humans to test a hypothesis, humans must reason on how to do so. All tests of a hypothesis are the result of human reasoning and are more than likely flawed do to intersubjective opinion. Every scientific test of a hypothesis is not an objective test of it. It is an intersubjective test based on human reasoning. That is your human opinion. :P I am of the opinion that external tests cannot exist and that all data is a subjective interpretation of reality. That scientific consensus is an intersubjective interpretation of reality that can asymptotically create "fake models" that represent reality. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Do electrons exits?
Top
Bottom