30 Nov 07
Originally posted by epiphinehashey...scientists have proven that a bumblebee can't fly due to it's weight and wing size
[b]Nobody knows that! It is a very hot and controverse topic and I think that one should only talk about it after some real serious thought, a lot of discussions with other people, and some real serious research.
Well, I'm not a scientist and this is not a scientific journal, so you probably shouldn't expect anything more than pure, undisciplined ...[text shortened]...
Would a serious scientist ever concede that imagination is more important than knowledge?[/b]
But noone ever told the bee.
Some things can be proven and some can't...simple as that.
Toast always lands on the floor butter side down...and cats always land on their feet...so if you strap a piece of buttered toast onto the back of a cat and then drop the cat upside down...what will happen?
Dave
( who got into real trouble with this experiment...along with cutting off the whiskers on one side of the cat...feeding a seagull an alka seltzer...trying to climb a barb wire fence with my hands in my pockets...and finally winning $20 by eating a complete jar of sliced jalapenos without drinking anything for 10 minutes...that one was bad...well next day worse...finally found a good use for those single popsickles...needless to say I was nutty when I was young )
30 Nov 07
1 edit
Originally posted by nmdavidbPerhaps you believe lots of things, however a little research will enlighten you as to the source of this rather persistant 'urban myth'. Human nature has more to do with bull like this than science.
hey...scientists have proven that a bumblebee can't fly due to it's weight and wing size
edit : Oh, and the cat with the buttered toast strapped to it's back spins just above the ground as you well know...
01 Dec 07
Originally posted by epiphinehasHillbert a german mathematician and a very serious scientist once inquired his class about why one of the students had stopped showing. The other students said that he had given up math and tried his luck as a poet. To this Hilbert answered: "Good, he doen't have enough imagination to be a mathematician!"
Would a serious scientist ever concede that imagination is more important than knowledge?
People always assume that scientists have no imagination and are calculating logical machines. That is so far away from what really happens. Like Feynman said scientists use their imagination but they used in a straight jacket. A poet can say and write whatever he wants but when a scientist is talking about the real world his word have to match the real world but doen't mean creativity is lacking in process. Feynman was a very creative scientist, Landau was too, Gauss, Newton of course. And a whole load of others were too. But it wasn't carzy creativity. Their new ideas and methods had to match what we see and for me that's harder than just shooting one's mouth off. Don't get me wrong cause I used to write poetry and I've read a lot of poetry and I truely enjoy it but what bothers is this dicotomy that soime people try to put up. I just think that it is creativity, or imagination if you prefer, but applied to different fields of the human endeavour.
I don't particualrly agree with that quote from Einstein but I can see some truth in it. Both are very needed and both are very important. Science couldn't be done just with one of them nor life could be lived. 😉
Ps: Sorry for the rant.
01 Dec 07
Originally posted by znshoThis presupposes that God sees things the same way we do; does it
That's my point. If the conclusion is correct, that observation causes waves to become particles, then all-observant God / Allah cannot ever witness waves. He / she / it is everywhere watching everything.
not? A lot of assumptions and declarations being done with this line of
reasoning, why would that be assumed?
Kelly
01 Dec 07
Originally posted by KellyJayFair enough. In fact, the conclusionj might just as be: The two-split experiment proves existence of God because the material universe requires an observer!
This presupposes that God sees things the same way we do; does it
not? A lot of assumptions and declarations being done with this line of
reasoning, why would that be assumed?
Kelly
02 Dec 07
Originally posted by epiphinehas“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.”
[b]Nobody knows that! It is a very hot and controverse topic and I think that one should only talk about it after some real serious thought, a lot of discussions with other people, and some real serious research.
Well, I'm not a scientist and this is not a scientific journal, so you probably shouldn't expect anything more than pure, undisciplined ...[text shortened]...
Would a serious scientist ever concede that imagination is more important than knowledge?[/b]
Albert Einstein
02 Dec 07
Originally posted by snowinscotlandHave they worked out the equations for that yet?
Perhaps you believe lots of things, however a little research will enlighten you as to the source of this rather persistant 'urban myth'. Human nature has more to do with bull like this than science.
edit : Oh, and the cat with the buttered toast strapped to it's back spins just above the ground as you well know...
02 Dec 07
Originally posted by epiphinehasMaybe not in so many words, but if his imagination was thought of as
[b]Nobody knows that! It is a very hot and controverse topic and I think that one should only talk about it after some real serious thought, a lot of discussions with other people, and some real serious research.
Well, I'm not a scientist and this is not a scientific journal, so you probably shouldn't expect anything more than pure, undisciplined ...[text shortened]...
Would a serious scientist ever concede that imagination is more important than knowledge?[/b]
knowledge he might. 🙂
Kelly
07 Dec 07
Originally posted by znshoCould you post a link?
1) Results of the two-split experiment shows that waves become matter when observed.
2) The two-split experiment shows that waves exist when not observed.
3) God / Allah is supposed to observe EVERYTHING, including two-split exepriments.
4) Since waves exist, they are not being observed.
5) It follows that God / Allah does not exist, since, if he / she / it did exist, then waves should not exist.
I have never heard either 1) or 2) postulated as a result of the two-slit experiment.
What this experiment does is show that light acts as both a wave and a particle. And you can make measurements that reveal either or both properties. I have never heard anyone say that a wave cannot be observed and that conclusion is directly opposite of what is observed in the two-slit experiment since the pattern developed is definitely a wave pattern.
So, if some scienctist is actually advocating your conclusions I would like to see their arguements.