Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Top-level
der.hans

@J12t opinion piece in the NYT not an article in a science magazine. Citing philosophers in a physics article seems strange

"But the model has already been patched up numerous times over the past half century to better conform with the best available data"

Yup, scientific theory adjusts to fit data rather than data adjusting to fit theory

The 4th Doctor said something about views fitting facts, not the other way around :)

mastodon.social/@guide@tardis.

2 comments
Johannes Ernst

@lufthans imho most interesting questions — to me at least — posed by either very large-scale or very small-scale physics border, or often cross over into philosophy. Start with the Copenhagen interpretation and continue to the simulation hypothesis … of course not everybody might be interested in those.

der.hans

@J12t physics is using math to describe the data of the universe

In the Matrix or not, physicists are exploring how the universe works via data and math

In my experience the simulationists don't show up with math

They might be right, but they need to demontrate CPU bugs or math to prove that the JWST is now rowhammering the heck out of the simulation system :)

Go Up