Author Topic: nvm  (Read 122 times)

Setamorphosis

nvm
« on: November 24, 2017, 03:49:50 am »
nvm
« Last Edit: December 02, 2017, 01:31:29 am by Setamorphosis »
"Darkness is just light turned inside out."
  --Beelzebub

Liu

Re: Science destroyed materialism; time to fight physicalism
« Reply #1 on: November 24, 2017, 10:01:45 am »
I'd say it depends on the definition.
In my understanding, physicalism is that everything follows the laws of nature (mainly those of physics, hence the name). Mathematical/logical laws would be included in those.
But there also seem to be other definitions of it (which are much more closer to your definition of materialism), so I suppose you rather mean those, e.g.
Quote from: Merriam Webster
Definition of physicalism:
a thesis that the descriptive terms of scientific language are reducible to terms which refer to spatiotemporal things or events or to their properties
That's what I would have understood by materialism, though.

Also, why would dark matter/energy refute materialism? Just because there is stuff that is not atoms, that doesn't mean that it's not matter. Wave–particle duality means that matter and energy are the same thing anyway.

In any case, my main argument against such theses would be the existence of consciousness. But even with that, it would be a matter of definition. If we consider consciousness and/or the mind a propery of something spatiotemporal, then it wouldn't contradict the definition I quoted. Natural science doesn't concern itself with things that happen in the mind. Only when the things that happen in the mind have an effect on physical objects it gets into the realm of science. But even then those effects are caused by certain properties of e.g. the human brain, namely its mental properties. Therefore, no contradiction.

Setamorphosis

Re: Science destroyed materialism; time to fight physicalism
« Reply #2 on: November 24, 2017, 11:33:15 am »
The definition of materialism I provided is the one that's commonly used. Either that, or that everything can be reduced to matter.

The findings I shared do contradict materialism because dark energy is not your usual energy. The one that comes to mind when you hear the word. Dark energy is something unknown at this point. It's invisible. The only thing that's known about it is that it's contributing to the acceleration of the universe.

Dark matter, too, is unknown. It's not your regular matter.

They don't seem to be the matter and energy that we're used to. They have different properties and characteristics. By the Law of Identity, they cannot be matter or energy as they're commonly understood.

And that's not what physicalism means. Physicalism is the notion that nothing is above and beyond the physical.
"Darkness is just light turned inside out."
  --Beelzebub

King Mob

Re: Science destroyed materialism; time to fight physicalism
« Reply #3 on: November 24, 2017, 09:59:52 pm »
I don't think it's possible to completely prove or disprove things when they get more complex.

I think if you're investigating atoms and that takes you to quantam mechanics which just throws a wrench in everything, no pun intended.

This is because quantam mechanics fundamentally questions a lot of things we previously new and raises a ton of new philosophical questions. However, this philosophical questions often get conflated as part of the science when this is not true making a layman's study of Quantam Mechanics rather impractical. You can look at Peter Carroll's later, more dogmatic works, to see how a misunderstanding of Quantam Mechanics can be a bad thing -in my opinion-.

So one would have to academically study it to have an opinion but the thing is, that appears to still be mainlly theoritical at this point when you get to the boundary pushing levels. Still, what we do know has led to some wonderful technological advances like teleportation of a quark or atom, I can't recall which. I am convinced that quantam mechanics is one of the mysteries that will never be solved in our lifetimes  with it only value in it being the questioning of previous science.

This is a great thing, less dogma. This is also a bad thing, more dogma as people latch on to philosophical ideas or conflate them with factual study.
"Be goodly therefore: dress ye all in fine apparel; eat rich foods and drink sweet wines and wines that foam! Also, take your fill and will of love as ye will, when, where and with whom ye will! But always unto me."- Nuit, Book of the Law.

Kapalika

Re: Science destroyed materialism; time to fight physicalism
« Reply #4 on: November 25, 2017, 05:56:44 am »
Someone fucking kill me.

I can't help but laugh a little, because it took a few seconds to stumble upon scientific evidence that tosses materialism to the garbage can where it belongs.

Modern physicists now know that the universe is composed of the following things:

73% - dark energy (responsible for the expansion of the universe)  <-- nothing else is known about it
23% - dark matter <-- can't be contained, goes through regular matter, doesn't interact with regular matter
4% - atoms

Dark matter DOES interact with regular matter... it IS matter. And Dark Energy IS material. Both have mass and thus are material and physical.. that's what the definition of material/physical is lol. Maybe if you took longer than "a few seconds" to try to understand what you were reading you would avoid making a complete fool of yourself.

For a fuller explanation....

Your main mistake is thinking that only baryonic matter is "material". All that 4% represents is the matter we can detect that is stuff like leptons and particles made of quarks (or stuff made of stuff that's made of quarks... such as atoms). Actually, there are experiments now to see how much of dark matter might just be undetected matter we already know about (such as neutrinos).

Also Dark matter does interact with other matter and energy through gravity that's how we discovered it; it just doesn't interact via the electromagnetic spectrum (hence being "dark"). We've observed this interaction over the last decade or two so it's proven to exist. Whatever it is, it has mass and so is physical/material.

Lastly those figures you gave are actually the percentage of energy of the known/observable Universe. All matter is is another form of energy. This might of been explained a century ago by a nobody patent clerk. I think his name was Albert or something. Ya, I remember now, he discovered two theories that were thoroughly tested revolving around light, gravity and the relation of matter and energy. "Special and General Relativity" I think they were called.

Quote
Materialism (notion that matter is the fundamental substance) is false.

While I have my own beliefs, that everything physical or not consists of a "neutralness" I wouldn't go around declaring materialism false per se, because I believe that nuetralness has a direct relationship to both physical and "abstract" phenomena. Between things like particle-wave duality, G.U.T., and the aforementioned matter-energy relationship, it wouldn't be at all a stretch in my opinion that "abstractness" and physical are the same thing. Well,  mean that's basically what i mean by nuetralness anyway.

Trika itself is "concrete monism" as they say and so if I am forced to pick either materialism or idealism I am forced to choose materialism on both a theological and evidential basis. I think it's more complex than that of course; the Universe has no obligation to be simple or clean cut.

Quote
Now, we also have physicalism which is a little trickier to disprove than materialism. I would say that math disproves physicalism. Numbers are immaterial. Everything in the universe is mathematical; it has its corresponding equation.

What is "physicalism" and how is it different than materialism? I've never heard the terms used to mean two distinct things. Also if numbers even exist in any real sense is debatable enough, let alone if they are physical or not. It could be argued that since it's a concept, it resides in a brain or computer as a result of a configuration of matter and thus is a part of the physical world.

Quote
What are your thoughts on this?

Truthfully, I find topics like this embarrassing. I honestly cringed. If you have any sense of decency you'd be best to change at last the title of the topic to something that isn't so outlandish.

EDIT;

The findings I shared do contradict materialism because dark energy is not your usual energy. The one that comes to mind when you hear the word.

Energy is still energy. And "what comes to mind" isn't any kind of definition used by science. Terms are precise not descriptive in physics.

Quote
Dark energy is something unknown at this point. It's invisible. The only thing that's known about it is that it's contributing to the acceleration of the universe.

Then wouldn't it be presumptuous it claim that it isn't physical? The fact is we don't know of anything that has mass/is energy that somehow isn't material. You can literally transform energy into matter as I explained earlier. I don't see why dark energy would be an exception particularly in the absence of any evidence otherwise.

Quote
Dark matter, too, is unknown. It's not your regular matter.

Black holes are also invisible but not classified as dark matter. All dark matter and dark energy connotate is that we've not worked out what they are, not that they are necessarily something totally exotic unlike we've seen before. Actually one hypothesis is that a lot of the dark matter is tons of small blackholes: https://www.space.com/25691-dark-matter-black-hole-atoms.html

Quote
They don't seem to be the matter and energy that we're used to. They have different properties and characteristics. By the Law of Identity, they cannot be matter or energy as they're commonly understood.

Well I'm not used to anti-matter but the sun creates a small amount of it, as does cosmic rays from the rest of the Universe hitting the upper atmosphere. It's still matter, and it's still physical. They still have all the same spectrum of parameters as normal matter. A positron for example has an opposite quantum spin and electric charge of an electron. There isn't any reason to suspect that dark matter or dark energy are in any inherent way different from any other matter or energy in the known Universe, and even if they were they are still physical given they both have mass and affect space-time (albiet for that last one in almost totally opposite ways).
« Last Edit: November 25, 2017, 06:47:01 am by Kapalika »
My Music and Blog // My Chatroom
My religion is Satanism & Trika via Vāmācāra (Left Hand path)
"God and the individual are one, to realize this is the essence of Shaivism.” - Lakshman Joo

Kapalika

Re: Science destroyed materialism; time to fight physicalism
« Reply #5 on: November 25, 2017, 06:44:00 am »
I'd say it depends on the definition.
In my understanding, physicalism is that everything follows the laws of nature (mainly those of physics, hence the name). Mathematical/logical laws would be included in those.
But there also seem to be other definitions of it (which are much more closer to your definition of materialism), so I suppose you rather mean those, e.g.
Quote from: Merriam Webster
Definition of physicalism:
a thesis that the descriptive terms of scientific language are reducible to terms which refer to spatiotemporal things or events or to their properties
That's what I would have understood by materialism, though.

The definition I am familiar with for what is physical, is just that which has energy/mass and thus locality.

Quote
Just because there is stuff that is not atoms, that doesn't mean that it's not matter. Wave–particle duality means that matter and energy are the same thing anyway.

Perhaps I am a little rusty but I'm not sure if waves are energy per se, but you're essentially right. The photoelectric effect proves that matter and energy are the same/convertible.

Quote
In any case, my main argument against such theses would be the existence of consciousness. But even with that, it would be a matter of definition. If we consider consciousness and/or the mind a propery of something spatiotemporal, then it wouldn't contradict the definition I quoted. Natural science doesn't concern itself with things that happen in the mind. Only when the things that happen in the mind have an effect on physical objects it gets into the realm of science. But even then those effects are caused by certain properties of e.g. the human brain, namely its mental properties. Therefore, no contradiction.

It's worth noting that in that spatial-temporal mind model thoughts exist as resulting from configurations of matter an so could theoretically be discerned if one had a way to measure that moment and enough computational power. At least, if one is a determinist.

I don't think it's possible to completely prove or disprove things when they get more complex.

It's possible just really hard and usually involves a shit ton of math and the work of countless faceless scientists across multiple generations.

Quote
I think if you're investigating atoms and that takes you to quantam mechanics which just throws a wrench in everything, no pun intended.

Ya, the Uncertainty Principle makes exact precision impossible. People make it out to be all spooky but to be honest it makes sense to me in a mechanical way why you need to interact with something to observe it... and thus changing something about how it's moving, where it is or what it's doing.

This is because quantam mechanics fundamentally questions a lot of things we previously new and raises a ton of new philosophical questions. However, this philosophical questions often get conflated as part of the science when this is not true making a layman's study of Quantam Mechanics rather impractical. You can look at Peter Carroll's later, more dogmatic works, to see how a misunderstanding of Quantam Mechanics can be a bad thing -in my opinion-. 

Well, it has implications indirectly for the philosopher but as you say quantum mysticism and pseudoscience really muddy the waters with gross misunderstandings of what it really is.

However it's worth pointing out that quantum mechanics need not necessarily be involved in explaining dark matter and energy although it is probably the best explanation for dark energy. There are some crazy hypothesis under the unproven M-"Theory" and the like about gravity leaking through higher dimensions from parallel Universes but I like my speculation to be based in something we can realistically predict and observe.

So one would have to academically study it to have an opinion but the thing is, that appears to still be mainlly theoritical at this point when you get to the boundary pushing levels. Still, what we do know has led to some wonderful technological advances like teleportation of a quark or atom, I can't recall which.

There's this really good book, probably fairly outdated now (Published in 2006), that I bought when I was a teenager: https://www.amazon.com/God-Effect-Entanglement-Strangest-Phenomenon-ebook/dp/B005QNHRHU

Really good stuff if you're into stuff like quantum entanglement. There might be a more up to date version but hell if I coul be bothered to find it There's at least a chapter dedicated to the teleportation experiments. I did a quick internet search and seems the Chinese teleported a photon to a satellite recently. By the time of the book they were only doing it a few miles on Earth (with electrons IIRC). In 2015 the first atoms were teleported.

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2014/01/16/scientists-report-teleportation-of-physical-objects-from-one-location-to-another/

http://time.com/4854718/quantum-entanglement-teleport-space/

Satan I love science.
My Music and Blog // My Chatroom
My religion is Satanism & Trika via Vāmācāra (Left Hand path)
"God and the individual are one, to realize this is the essence of Shaivism.” - Lakshman Joo

Setamorphosis

Re: Science destroyed materialism; time to fight physicalism
« Reply #6 on: November 25, 2017, 06:57:39 am »
Hey, thanks for the correction. I see the mistake now. :)

Also, I don't understand your anger and frustration. I'm human, and like all other humans I make mistakes.
"Darkness is just light turned inside out."
  --Beelzebub

Kapalika

Re: Science destroyed materialism; time to fight physicalism
« Reply #7 on: November 25, 2017, 08:29:16 am »
Hey, thanks for the correction. I see the mistake now. :)

Also, I don't understand your anger and frustration. I'm human, and like all other humans I make mistakes.

Frustration, yes. Angry, no.

I didn't intend to be overly harsh (my apologies if so) but I was just kind of taken aback by how sure you were of the deceleration when you admittedly hadn't really looked into it or knew much about the subject.

Since I was really young I've always took an interest in astronomy and so it's easy for me to get annoyed when something's really wrong and someone seems convinced otherwise.
« Last Edit: November 25, 2017, 09:31:57 am by Kapalika »
My Music and Blog // My Chatroom
My religion is Satanism & Trika via Vāmācāra (Left Hand path)
"God and the individual are one, to realize this is the essence of Shaivism.” - Lakshman Joo

King Mob

Re: Science destroyed materialism; time to fight physicalism
« Reply #8 on: November 25, 2017, 10:25:01 am »
@Kapalika I totally understand that, it's easy to lose your temper when someone is confidently ignorant of a subject you're passionate about. I've always been like that with history.

"Be goodly therefore: dress ye all in fine apparel; eat rich foods and drink sweet wines and wines that foam! Also, take your fill and will of love as ye will, when, where and with whom ye will! But always unto me."- Nuit, Book of the Law.