Catholic nonsense

[muppet]

C'mon OJ! (I'd call you Einstein except you are wayyy beyond Einstein at this stage.)

Phenomena not explained
The Standard Model is inherently an incomplete theory. There are fundamental physical phenomena in nature that the Standard Model does not adequately explain:

Gravity. The standard model does not explain gravity. The approach of simply adding a "graviton" (whose properties are the subject of considerable consensus among physicists if it exists) to the Standard Model does not recreate what is observed experimentally without other modifications, as yet undiscovered, to the Standard Model. Moreover, instead, the Standard Model is widely considered to be incompatible with the most successful theory of gravity to date, general relativity.[3]

Dark matter and dark energy. Cosmological observations tell us the standard model explains about 5% of the energy present in the universe. About 26% should be dark matter, which would behave just like other matter, but which only interacts weakly (if at all) with the Standard Model fields. Yet, the Standard Model does not supply any fundamental particles that are good dark matter candidates. The rest (69%) should be dark energy, a constant energy density for the vacuum. Attempts to explain dark energy in terms of vacuum energy of the standard model lead to a mismatch of 120 orders of magnitude.[4]

Neutrino masses. According to the standard model, neutrinos are massless particles. However, neutrino oscillation experiments have shown that neutrinos do have mass. Mass terms for the neutrinos can be added to the standard model by hand, but these lead to new theoretical problems. For example, the mass terms need to be extraordinarily small and it is not clear if the neutrino masses would arise in the same way that the masses of other fundamental particles do in the Standard Model.
Matter–antimatter asymmetry.

The universe is made out of mostly matter. However, the standard model predicts that matter and antimatter should have been created in (almost) equal amounts if the initial conditions of the universe did not involve disproportionate matter relative to antimatter. Yet, no mechanism sufficient to explain this asymmetry exists in the Standard Model.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_beyond_the_Standard_Model

[omaghjoe]

Higgs didn't give us a dark energy particle or account for the rapid expansion of the universe. You obviously know better though.

Accounting for gravity would be an even bigger gaping hole, which is only thing that dark matter interacts with.... yet in spite of this the model adds up for understanding matter which is what its goal is.

So enter the mathematicians with string theory to try and pull it all together

[J70]

Then again who says logic as we understand it holds.. after all quantum randomness and spooky action have bee detected in quantum mechanics and they are completely illogical, thus blowing the long held belief in science of a deterministic naturalist universe completely out of the water.

I don't get this. Please expand.

And why would this make the case for a non- naturalist universe, presumably creationist, any stronger?

What dont you get?

A non-naturalist universe is simply one that is not naturalist. It doesnt make the case for anything else stronger but quantum randomness seemingly dispels the notion. But then who knows.... maybe dark matter is controlling it 

I don't get why quantum randomness and spooky action blow the naturalist outlook out of the water.

Because a naturalist universe is based on causality coming from inherent laws of nature where every event is determined. Randomness doesn't adhere to either of those.

So there is no causality, no predictability? At any level? And why does every event have to be determined? Probability doesn't come into it?
Again, I'm obviously missing something here.

[muppet]

Higgs didn't give us a dark energy particle or account for the rapid expansion of the universe. You obviously know better though.

Accounting for gravity would be an even bigger gaping hole, which is only thing that dark matter interacts with.... yet in spite of this the model adds up for understanding matter which is what its goal is.

So enter the mathematicians with string theory to try and pull it all together

A truly remarkable conclusion, given that dark matter is not explained.

The Standard Model will be updated or replaced with new discoveries. It isn't remotely finished or complete, or has achieved its 'goal', as you suggest.

[omaghjoe]

Then again who says logic as we understand it holds.. after all quantum randomness and spooky action have bee detected in quantum mechanics and they are completely illogical, thus blowing the long held belief in science of a deterministic naturalist universe completely out of the water.

I don't get this. Please expand.

And why would this make the case for a non- naturalist universe, presumably creationist, any stronger?

What dont you get?

A non-naturalist universe is simply one that is not naturalist. It doesnt make the case for anything else stronger but quantum randomness seemingly dispels the notion. But then who knows.... maybe dark matter is controlling it 

I don't get why quantum randomness and spooky action blow the naturalist outlook out of the water.

Because a naturalist universe is based on causality coming from inherent laws of nature where every event is determined. Randomness doesn't adhere to either of those.

So there is no causality, no predictability? At any level? And why does every event have to be determined? Probability doesn't come into it?
Again, I'm obviously missing something here.

Everything is determined by the laws of nature... thats the theory of the naturalist universe??
There is causality and predictability in a classical and practical sense of course but quantum randomness could thrown them off especially when dealing things with alot of repeat ability or at that level. Fro example I could get program a robot to throw a basket ball into a net from 20metres say in a controlled environment (same air pressure temperature etc. And it would hit the net every time right but at some point (maybe  the billionth or zillionth time) quantum randomness would conspire to make the robot miss.

[omaghjoe]

Higgs didn't give us a dark energy particle or account for the rapid expansion of the universe. You obviously know better though.

Accounting for gravity would be an even bigger gaping hole, which is only thing that dark matter interacts with.... yet in spite of this the model adds up for understanding matter which is what its goal is.

So enter the mathematicians with string theory to try and pull it all together

A truly remarkable conclusion, given that dark matter is not explained.

The Standard Model will be updated or replaced with new discoveries. It isn't remotely finished or complete, or has achieved its 'goal', as you suggest.

So dark matter is definitely matter then? I hadn't heard about that! when was that confirmed? What if its just just some quirk of gravity at large scales? There is nothing to suggest its present a a quantum level

Highly unlikely that the Standard model will be replaced, more likely is that some mathematician will bring it all together with String theory and that will become the prevailing notion of reality, but then how are those string theory experiments coming on?

[J70]

Some assume for the sake of argument that you are right, Joe, and the billionth throw will miss... what does that mean? That physics and chemistry do not follow predictable laws? Or that they do most of the time? Are there examples which are explained by this?

[muppet]

Higgs didn't give us a dark energy particle or account for the rapid expansion of the universe. You obviously know better though.

Accounting for gravity would be an even bigger gaping hole, which is only thing that dark matter interacts with.... yet in spite of this the model adds up for understanding matter which is what its goal is.

So enter the mathematicians with string theory to try and pull it all together

A truly remarkable conclusion, given that dark matter is not explained.

The Standard Model will be updated or replaced with new discoveries. It isn't remotely finished or complete, or has achieved its 'goal', as you suggest.

So dark matter is definitely matter then? I hadn't heard about that! when was that confirmed? What if its just just some quirk of gravity at large scales? There is nothing to suggest its present a a quantum level

Highly unlikely that the Standard model will be replaced, more likely is that some mathematician will bring it all together with String theory and that will become the prevailing notion of reality, but then how are those string theory experiments coming on?

You can answer that yourself, you are the only one talking about String Theory.

As for dark matter, not definitely being matter? Your whole argument here has been is that we know so little and of that we can't be certain that we know anything. Then, incredibly, you insist we know everything there is to know about matter with the Standard Model. When I point out the holes in that claim, you are back to saying we don't know anything about it again.

[seafoid]

The Bible is very skimpy on stuff like viruses. And where was God during the Holocaust? What did Anne Frank do to deserve dying in Auschwitz? Were the Nazis only fulfilling scripture ?

[omaghjoe]

Some assume for the sake of argument that you are right, Joe, and the billionth throw will miss... what does that mean? That physics and chemistry do not follow predictable laws? Or that they do most of the time? Are there examples which are explained by this?

Its just means that a naturalist universe does not appear to be the case and the basic notions of determinism and laws fall down which is my original point. If the laws are predictable great but if they are not absolute then they arent really laws are they?

In terms of classical physics at a low gravity like ours I dont think it matters a diddly but if we are trying to discover further knowledge at quantum level and high gravities then it makes things increasingly difficult to predict and theorise with any kind of certainty. I googled examples of it a classical level and the arent really any good ones, they tend to be where there are alot of events strung together.. nuclear decay is one apparently and in microbiology, actually I might have read somewhere that mutations are random, but that might be more chaotic than truly random.

I think I read somewhere that someone tried to relate our free will to quantum randomness but failed. Regardless its weird shit tho not as weird as spooky action IMO

[omaghjoe]

Higgs didn't give us a dark energy particle or account for the rapid expansion of the universe. You obviously know better though.

Accounting for gravity would be an even bigger gaping hole, which is only thing that dark matter interacts with.... yet in spite of this the model adds up for understanding matter which is what its goal is.

So enter the mathematicians with string theory to try and pull it all together

A truly remarkable conclusion, given that dark matter is not explained.

The Standard Model will be updated or replaced with new discoveries. It isn't remotely finished or complete, or has achieved its 'goal', as you suggest.

So dark matter is definitely matter then? I hadn't heard about that! when was that confirmed? What if its just just some quirk of gravity at large scales? There is nothing to suggest its present a a quantum level

Highly unlikely that the Standard model will be replaced, more likely is that some mathematician will bring it all together with String theory and that will become the prevailing notion of reality, but then how are those string theory experiments coming on?

You can answer that yourself, you are the only one talking about String Theory.

As for dark matter, not definitely being matter? Your whole argument here has been is that we know so little and of that we can't be certain that we know anything. Then, incredibly, you insist we know everything there is to know about matter with the Standard Model. When I point out the holes in that claim, you are back to saying we don't know anything about it again.

Muppet I must apologise, I should have pointed out when I am talking about science I am referring to them about they exist in an empirical or scientific sense not in a true reality sense. So when I say that the Standard Model is complete I mean scientifically it adds up as a model for empirical Matter which is what its aim was, sorry if that was not clear.

Trying to detect dark mattter "quantumly" is nigh on impossible considering it has only be detected interacting with gravity at a galactic level and detecting gravity quantumly has never been even close to achieved. This is where the string theorist come in to try and tie thing together.

Tho if you want to return talking about our main point which was about the nature true reality please start by answering my question about a brain in vat and then when your finished with that tell me how you know we arent going to see any more black swans?

[muppet]

Just on dark matter...

http://www.iflscience.com/space/could-scientists-have-finally-detected-dark-matter-signal/

Early days obviously.

As for the brain in a vat... Does it matter (sorry!)?

All we can do it interpret and learn to understand the world as we see it (or as it is presented to us). If it is us that is the experiment, then our chances are far better playing along, aren't they?

[easytiger95]

Muppet I must apologise, I should have pointed out when I am talking about science I am referring to them about they exist in an empirical or scientific sense not in a true reality sense. So when I say that the Standard Model is complete I mean scientifically it adds up as a model for empirical Matter which is what its aim was, sorry if that was not clear.

The funniest bit is the "sorry if that was not clear"

[seafoid]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5ide3eVNxQ

[omaghjoe]

Just on dark matter...

http://www.iflscience.com/space/could-scientists-have-finally-detected-dark-matter-signal/

Early days obviously.

As for the brain in a vat... Does it matter (sorry!)?

All we can do it interpret and learn to understand the world as we see it (or as it is presented to us). If it is us that is the experiment, then our chances are far better playing along, aren't they?

Indeed it could be dark matter but more likely not, I wouldn't hang my hat on every weird configuration of photons being dark matter

Im not really asking what I should do if i am a brain in a vat but it sounds like a good enough plan, tho I dont think Orpheus will be showing up for you. But anyway as far as my question goes I'll take that as a.... I dont know