카테고리 아카이브: 물리학

물리학은 내 첫 사랑이었다. 이 범주 내 마음에 게시물 가장 가까운 포함. 스물 년 지금부터, 이 블로그는 통과하면, 이 범주는 아마 내 대부분의 지속적인 통찰력을 개최합니다. 그리고 이백년 지금부터, 나는 전혀 기억하고 있어요 경우, 이들 통찰력이 될 것입니다; 하지 내가 사람의 종류, 걸 돈, 도 아무것도. Only for my first and last love…

입자와 상호 작용

최근에, 나는 DESY에 여행을 계획하고 있었다 내 딸의 친구들을 입자와 상호 작용에 대한 이야기​​를했다, 독일과에 대한 모든 무엇의 아이디어를 가지고 싶어. 이러한 종류의 내 첫 번째 이야기로, 내가 아는하지 않았기 때문에 나는 약간 긴장 수준을, 및 배경, 나는의 이야기를 말뚝한다. 나는 너무 기본적인 만들고 싶어하지 않았다, 나는 시간 낭비 일 것이다라고 생각하는. 도 아니다 나는 너무 기술적 만들고 싶어 않았다, 또한 다른 방법으로는 쓸모 만들 것이다.

계속 읽기

Sensory and Physical Worlds

Animals have different sensory capabilities compared to us humans. Cats, 예를 들어, can hear up to 60kHz, while the highest note we have ever heard was about 20kHz. 분명히, we could hear that high a note only in our childhood. 그래서, if we are trying to pull a fast one on a cat with the best hifi multi-channel, Dolby-whatever recording of a mouse, we will fail pathetically. It won’t be fooled because it lives in a different sensory world, while sharing the same physical world as ours. There is a humongous difference between the sensory and physical worlds.

계속 읽기

자유 의지의 문제

자유 의지 문제입니다. 우리 모두는 물리적 시스템이있는 경우, 물리학의 법칙에 순종, 모든 우리의 움직임과 정신 상태는 이전에 일어난 사건에 의해 발생. 무엇 때문에 발생하는 것은 완전히 원인에 의해 결정된다. 그래서 무엇이든 우리가 지금하고 다음 분에 할 것은 모든 사전 안수 선행 이벤트 및 원인에 의해, 우리는 그것을 제어 할 수 없습니다. 우리는 자유 의지를 가질 수있는 방법? 사실 나는 자유 의지에이 메모를 작성하고 있음 — 그것은 완전히 완전히 시간 태고의 사건에 의해 결정된다? 그건 바로 소리를하지 않습니다.

계속 읽기

What Does it Feel Like to be a Bat?

It is a sensible question: What does it feel like to be a bat? Although we can never really know the answer (because we can never be bats), we know that there is an answer. It feels like something to be a bat. 음, at least we think it does. We think bats have 의식 and conscious feelings. 한편, it is not a sensible question to ask what it feels like to be brick or a table. It doesn’t feel like anything to be an inanimate object.

계속 읽기

기타 알려진 음모

이 활짝 열려 불어까지 음모 이론은 괴짜에 대한 이론과 사료를 유지. 그 시점에서, 괴짜는 수상 경력이있는 기자가되고 국가의 영웅으로 간주 된 지도자들은 반사회적 범죄자가 될. 그런은 여론의 변덕 스러움입니다, 그리고 그것은과 함께합니다 9/11 음모가 널리 알려지게 (그것은 이제까지 않는 경우) 이 음모였습니다.

계속 읽기

The Origins of Gods

The atheist-theist debate boils down to a simple question — Did humans discover God? 또는, did we invent Him? The difference between discovering and inventing is the similar to the one between believing and knowing. Theist believe that there was a God to be discovered. Atheists “알고” that we humans invented the concept of God. Belief and knowledge differ only slightly — knowledge is merely a very very strong belief. A belief is considered knowledge when it fits in nicely with a larger worldview, which is very much like how a hypothesis in physics becomes a theory. While a theory (such as Quantum Mechanics, 예를 들어) is considered to be knowledge (or the way the physical world really is), it is best not to forget the its lowly origin as a mere hypothesis. My focus in this post is the possible origin of the God hypothesis.

계속 읽기

9/11 Debunkers

개인적으로, one of the main reasons I started taking the conspiracy theories about 9/11 seriously is the ardor and certainty of the so-called debunkers. They are so sure of their views and so ready with their explanations that they seem rehearsed, coached or even incentivized. Looking at the fire-induced, symmetric, and free-fall collapse of WTC7, how can anyone with any level of scientific background be so certain? The best a debunker could say would be something like, “예, the free-fall and the symmetry aspects of the collapse do look quite strange. But the official explanation seems plausible. 적어도, it is more plausible than a wild conspiracy by the government to kill 3000 of our own citizens.” But that is not at all the way they put it. They laugh at the conspiracy theories, make emotional statements about the technical claims, and ignore the questions that they cannot explain away. They toe the official line even when it is clearly unscientific. They try to attack the credibility of the conspiracy camp despite the obvious fact that it has the support of many seasoned professionals, like architects, physics teachers, structural engineers and university professors.

계속 읽기

Atheism and Unreal God

The only recourse an atheist can have against this argument based on personal experience is that the believer is either is misrepresenting his experience or is mistaken about it. I am not willing to pursue that line of argument. I know that I am undermining my own stance here, but I would like to give the theist camp some more ammunition for this particular argument, and make it more formal.

계속 읽기

9/11 – Motives for Mass Murder

In the first post in this series, we saw that 7 World Trade Center building was the smoking gun of a possible conspiracy behind the 9/11 attack. The manner in which it collapsed and the way the collapse was investigated are strong indications of a conspiracy and a cover up. 그러나, when I first heard of the conspiracy theory in any serious form, the first question I asked myself was why – what possible motive could any person or organization have to commit mass murder at this scale? I honestly couldn’t see any, and as long as you don’t see one, you cannot take these conspiracy theories seriously. 물론, if you buy the official story that the conspiracy actually originated in Afghanistan among terrorist monsters, you don’t need to look for any rational motives.

계속 읽기

Atheism vs. God Experience

I have a reason for delaying this post on the fifth and last argument for God by Dr. William Lane Craig. It holds more potency than immediately obvious. While it is easy to write it off because it is a subjective, experiential argument, the lack of credence we attribute to subjectivity is in itself a result of our similarly subjective acceptance of what we consider objective reason and rationality. I hope that this point will become clearer as you read this post and the next one.

계속 읽기