Omicron --
- "Identified" by a computer program, NOT by observation of any fluid from any person
- There is NO test to identify it
- There are NO scientific papers for research of it
It does not exist outside of a computer program.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (23)
sorted by:
Quantum Physics is ALL made up too... The more you realize!
Well...
Quantum physics is a model that fits experiment. I personally have done many experiments that are explained very well by the mathematical model that is quantum physics. It's an excellent theory, that fits measurements.
What it isn't is a statement of Truth, but it doesn't claim to be.
All of physics are mathematical models that fit experiments. These models can then be used to help us make things. They are sufficiently accurate that they can be applied in a predictive manner, and these "predictions" can be used to engineer useful devices.
Don't confuse Theory with Truth. Science doesn't, even if scientists sometimes do in their naivety and their belief in scientific dogma.
That has been one of the BIG revelations of the past two years: A large percentage of "scientists" do not follow (or even know about or acknowledge) the Scientific Method, which means they are not engaged in science at all.
This is predictable and has been predicted for decades by libertarians. Everything government controls becomes corrupted. Since government controls today's science and medicine, both fields have become corrupt and they follow political whim, not science.
Quantum physics includes data from over a century of experiments and observations; the mathematical model fits the observations very well. That doesn't mean a better model won't come along -- Newton's model fits the world closely enough that it's still used quite a lot because at human-scale speeds, masses, etc Newton's equations give essentially the same values as quantum equations do, and Newton's equations are a bunch easier to calculate.
But observations from quantum experiments describe a world that makes no sense to us -- and THAT's what makes it interesting, to me at least. There are probably 25 or more theories about quantum fundamentals -- about what sort of world is actually being described by the math and the observations.
The Quantum Enigma: Physics Encounters Consciousness by Rosenblum and Kuttner describes a dozen or so different theories describing possible answers to that question, and quite a few more are out there. The Idea of the World by Kastrup is another that'll give you a sense of how very different these approaches can be.
Can you give me a quick run down on that? I haven't looked into it.
Anything Quantum is "Theory", based on "theory", based on "theory", etc... other posters here have said "over a century of experiments and observations"... Its all models that they are referencing for "experiments and observations".
What else should it be? Do you know what "theory" means? It means that it has massive amounts of experimental verification as a reasonable model.
Science NEVER makes statements of Truth. It never pretends to make statements of Truth. People make statements of Truth, and they are always wrong, no matter which language they use, even math.
In the framework of the languages we know, mathematical theories (like QM) are the closest to Truth (how the universe works) that we have gotten.
But everyone knows the theories are incomplete. How incomplete? We have no idea. Probably very incomplete. As long as you don't expect science to ever make statements of Truth, you and science will always be copacetic.
I read that a few times and it still didn't bolster your argument. Science is only what has been observed and what is likely... Quantum Physics is an entire field of research based of unverifiable assumptions that is completely devoid of any factual basis. And it pays good too... What a combo!