Re: THE FALSE START OF DEDUCTIVE SCIENCE

[spiritual matter]

I'm not sure if the entities of physics exist in real life. Physicists
claim to have seen them but I have not. I've never seen an atom, or an
electron, or a photon, or a proton or a neutron. I've never seen these
particles with my own eyes that's why I'm not sure if they even exist.
That's why I have to rely on the physicists who claim to have seen
them.

I choose the term spiritual matter because I believe that semantics
and cognitive science also play a role in the physical world.

[spiritual matter]

Some of the entities of physics I know exist for sure in the real
world like radiation and heat. Everyone can feel the heat of the sun's
radiation of his skin in a hot summer day. It's burning. But for other
entities like electrons, protons, photons and quarks I have strong
doubts if they really exist in the world.

And this opens yet another question: If electrons, protons and
neutrons really exist in the real world (and not just in theory), then
why aren't visible to the naked human eye? Why do we need powerful
instruments like scanning tunneling microscopes and particle
accelerators to really observe these particles?

[spiritual matter]

Some of the entities of physics I know exist for sure in the real

world like radiation and heat. You can feel the heat of the sun's
radiation of your skin in a hot summer day. It's burning. But as for

other entities like electrons, protons, photons and quarks I have
strong doubts if they really exist in the world.

And this opens yet another question: If electrons, protons and

neutrons really exist in the real world (and not just in theory or on
paper), then why aren't they visible to the naked human eye? Why do we

need powerful instruments like scanning tunneling microscopes and
particle accelerators to really observe these particles?

Physics the way it is taught today is more a religion than a true
science. And this is where linguistic science and especially semantics
and also cognitive science come in to complete and to fill the holes
and gaps in physics education.

[spiritual matter]

Some of the entities of physics I know for sure exist in the real

world like radiation and heat. You can feel the heat of the sun's

radiation on your skin in a hot summer day. It's burning.

But as for the other entities like electrons, protons, photons and
quarks I have strong doubts if they really exist in the real world and
not just on paper.

And this opens yet another question: If electrons, protons and
neutrons really exist in the real world (and not just in theory or on
paper), then why aren't they visible to the naked human eye? Why do we
need powerful instruments like scanning tunneling microscopes and

particle accelerators to observe these particles for real?

Physics the way it is taught today is more a religion than a true
science. And this is where linguistic science and especially semantics

and also cognitive science come in to complete and to fill in the
holes, gaps and contradictions in physics education.

[Uncle Al]

spiritual matter wrote:
[snip crap]

> But as for
> other entities like electrons,

SLAC, x-ray tubes, EPR, electron diffraction, electron microscopes,
shot noise, Benjamin Franklin, wall sockets, static cling, Marx
generators, electrochemistry, diodes

> protons,

FermiLab, CERN, acids, solar wind, cosmic rays, proton NMR, MRI,
Super-Kamiokande, neutron diffraction, hydrogenation, Lyman-alpha,
1.4204057517667 GHz cosmic hyperfine transition

> photons

photoelectric effect, pair production, x-ray diffraction, dielectric
mirrors, etalons, polarization, photon counting, CCDs, Maxwell,
quantum electrodynamics, light pressure, blackbody radiation

>and quarks

deep scattering experiments, partons, quantum chromodynamics

> I have
> strong doubts if they really exist in the world.

The universe doesn't give a rats ass how ignorant you are of its
workings. Deny them all and die.

idiot

> And this opens yet another question: If electrons, protons and
> neutrons really exist in the real world (and not just in theory or on
> paper), then why aren't they visible to the naked human eye?

Hey fucking stooopid, does H1N1 swine flu exist?
Hey fucking stooopid, did Rutherford see multiple MeV alpha particles
bounce off gold leaf onto a spinthariscope plate?

Hey fucking stooopid, what does the inside of a brick look like?

> Why do we
> need powerful instruments like scanning tunneling microscopes and
> particle accelerators to really observe these particles?

Hey fucking stooopid, do bacteria exist?
Hey fucking stooopid, do polymer molecules exist?
Hey fucking stooopid, does air exist? Does it diffuse through your
pressurized tires without there being a physical leak?
Hey fucking stooopid, does radiation exist?
Hey fucking stooopid, does magnetism exist?
Hey fucking stooopid, does hafnium-based 45 nm hi-k metal gate silicon
CPU technology exist?

> Physics the way it is taught today is more a religion than a true
> science. And this is where linguistic science and especially semantics
> and also cognitive science come in to complete and to fill the holes

> and gaps in physics education.]

idiot

Aristotle, 476 AD to 1054 AD, Timmy Aquinas, scientific socialism,
diversity... bullshit. There exist only engineering solutions.
Empirical reality cannot be bribed, seduced, legislated, or avoided.

idiot

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2

[KK]

spiritual matter wrote:

> really exist in the real world

At first, we should define the meaning of "real existance". But this is
question to philosofers, not to physicist...

> (and not just in theory or on
> paper)

In fact, it makes no difference to physics. When we have model, that is
correct with observations, we can use it.

Sorry for my poor English.