HOW nature works
Jacques
still true?
" ... while I am describing to you HOW Nature works, you won't
understand WHY Nature works that way. But you see, nobody understands
that. I can't explain why Nature behaves in this peculiar way." (QED
Chapter 1: "Introduction", p. 8)
Thanks
Jacques
dedanoe
know the lever law and you'll know how and why nature works at the
same time
Androcles
"Jacques" <jako...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:4af9876e-5bf4-45e0...@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
Yes, they can't.
Dirk Van de moortel
Only religion and philosophy try to answer the why-questions.
Bad religion and bad philosophy do answer them.
Dirk Vdm
srp...@gmail.com
It still is true for all Copenhagen school of thought believers.
Feynman
was of that philosophy, which began end of the 1920's with Heisenberg
and Bohr.
All causalists, like Planck, de Broglie, Einstein and all others
always
thought that some day, as the experimental knowledge base increased
this would be understood more and more.
André Michaud
lundsl...@yahoo.com
OLD MESSAGE BY ALEXANDER ABIAN:
From: Alexander Abian
Date: Fri, Sep 3 1993 2:43 am
Email: ab...@iastate.edu (Alexander Abian)
Groups: sci.physics
The Party Line of Physics Politburo is:
PHYSICS IS NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF WHY
(PL)
PHYSICS IS IN THE BUSINESS OF HOW
as evidenced by the constant referral to the above by almost every
physicist.
Nothing can be further than the truth. Nothing can be more damaging
to the
advancement of Physics than the Party Line (PL).
KEPLER showed HOW THE PLANETS MOVE. HE SHOWED HOW (in elliptic
orbits)
NEWTON, committed the cardinal sin, the hideous crime, and asked
WHY !!
According to the (PL) Newton broke the sacro-sanct tenet of
PHYSICS. He
asked WHY the planets move in elliptic orbits. WHY, WHY !
The hysterical fear of physicists to "open Pandora's box " and fall
into
infinite regress apparently did not stop NEWTON.
What infinite regress ?! No one implies that WHY's should be
repeated
in infinite succession ! No, NEWTON asked WHY and gave explanations.
Many,
many, years later EINSTEIN asked WHY and gave explanation. Many,
years
later ABIAN is asking WHY and is giving explanations : TIME HAS
INERTIA,
there is EQUIVALENCE OF TIME AND MATTER and there is SECURITY
SEEKING
TENDENCY IN EVERY OBJECT, ANIMATE OR INANIMATE !!!
ALL THESE WHY'S ARE THE REAL MOVER OF SCIENCE TO HIGHER AND HIGHER
LEVELS.
ALL THESE PERIODIC WHY'S ARE ESSENTIAL FOR THE HEALTH OF
PHYSICS !
I am asking you ladies and gentlemen DID NEWTON ASK WHY the planets
move in elliptical orbits !! Or did he keep his mouth shut !
WHY this breaker of (PL) is considered one of the greatest
Physicists?
Even greater than KEPLER who showed HOW !!
Is there anyone who objects to Newton's committing the ghastly crime
of asking
WHY ! WHY planets move in elliptic orbits !!
Without WHY, Physics will become a RELIGION an enslaving
political
organization, an establishment which paralyzes the HUMAN GENIUS AND
MIND !.
Is Newton excommunicated from PHYSICS establishment because he
asked
WHY planets move in elliptic orbits ! Is he forgiven ? Shouldn't he
had kept his mouth shut and just said : DON'T ASK WHY PLANETS MOVE IN
ELLIPTIC ORBITS -this is not the business of PHYSICS. Kepler has
shown and
described HOW and thus, NO MORE QUESTIONS WHY ! WHY does not belong
to
Physics - only HOW. Kepler belongs to Physics, Newton does not
belong to
Physics - he asked WHY !
I am asking you ladies and gentlemen to reject the Party Line (PL)
imme-
diately AND NEVER, NEVER REPEAT IT AGAIN ! NEVER ! NEVER AGAIN !!
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
TIME HAS INERTIA. EQUIVALENCE OF TIME AND MASS: (1/T)+(1/log M) = 1
(ABIAN).
ALTER EARTH'S ORBIT AND TILT - STOP EPIDEMICS OF CANCER, CHOLERA,
AIDS, ETC.
VENUS MUST BE GIVEN A NEAR EARTH-LIKE ORBIT TO BECOME A BORN AGAIN
EARTH
ed wolf
> Can anyone tell me whether the following quote from Richard Feynman is
> still true?
>
> " ... while I am describing to you HOW Nature works, you won't
> understand WHY Nature works that way. But you see, nobody understands
> that. I can't explain why Nature behaves in this peculiar way."
Hi
It was true when? And what happened since? ; )
You could define Nature as " All that is." What that leads to in
respect
of "why" I cant figure out properly, guess it excludes any possible
"why".
You could use the word poetically, meaning something in your context
that
cant be defined narrowly, probably thats what Feynman did.
No problem asking why, poetic license granted.
If you use "Nature" not as a figure of speech, but as a serious entity
in explaining
what is, I want to know which observation can best be explained with a
"Nature"
doing this or that. Starting, simple enough, with an example of
something
unnatural, maybe? If Nature is defined as active in a way so you can
reasonably ask "why", you can also ask "who is it" and "where is it",
and "where does it end?". Leads straight to some New Age Gaia, or a
Creator of Irreducible Intelligence.
If that´s what your aiming at, nice try!
ed
Dirk Van de moortel
930a7a0d-a7b2-4bd6...@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com
Yes, and then he answered the how-question.
After that he went back to alchemy, looking for the philosper's
stone http://www.newtonproject.sussex.ac.uk/prism.php?id=46
Dirk Vdm
Jacques
> KEPLER showed HOW THE PLANETS MOVE. HE SHOWED HOW (in elliptic
> orbits)
>
> NEWTON, committed the cardinal sin, the hideous crime, and asked
> WHY !!
Who told you that? I found this quote which says quite the opposite:
"I have told you you how it moves, not why." (Quote of Newton in
Feynman: "The Character of Physical Law", p. 37)
Jacques
Dirk Van de moortel
Yes, exactly my point. He probably *asked* why, and he found how.
What is wrong with asking why anyway? I think it's a very important
question, even if we don't get the answer. I don't understand what's
eating this lundslactare character with his "cardinal sins and hideous
crimes". A violent childhood perhaps?
Dirk Vdm
dedanoe
<dirkvandemoor...@nospAm.hotmail.com> wrote:
> Jacques <jakob...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
>
> 3f50451d-e4b6-4a63-bb40-dae609c4a...@l64g2000hse.googlegroups.com
maybe newton asked why or how planets move but he didn't gave the
correct answer to any of it. the correct answer belongs to archimedes
who made planetarium on the basis of knowing how (on the basis of
knowing the lever law) 19centuries before newton's eureka. whenever
you see ellipse or spiral know that some lever stands behind it.
Jacques
<dirkvandemoor...@nospAm.hotmail.com> wrote:
> > "I have told you you how it moves, not why." (Quote of Newton in
> > Feynman: "The Character of Physical Law", p. 37)
>
> > Jacques
>
> Yes, exactly my point. He probably *asked* why, and he found how.
> What is wrong with asking why anyway? I think it's a very important
> question, even if we don't get the answer.
I agree that there's nothing wrong with asking why. I only want to say
that all scientific answers given till now to this question seem
rather descriptions than explanations, as Feynman pointed out, we
cannot understand why nature behaves in a particular way:
"It is my task to convince you not to turn away because you
don't understand it. You see, my physics students don't understand it
either. That is because I don't understand it. Nobody does." (QED,
Chapter 1: "Introduction", p. 8)
Jacques
Igor
It's still true, but I think the confusion arises from the everyday
usage of the two words. Quite often someone will say why when they
actually mean how.