From: psperson@old.netcom.invalid
On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 11:05:50 -0800, Bobbie Sellers
wrote:
>
>
>On 1/8/26 08:54, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2026 10:46:18 -0800, Bobbie Sellers
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/7/26 09:47, Paul S Person wrote:
>>>> I hope they have some mathematical basis for these hidden dimensions
>>>> and are not simply grasping at whatever they can think of in their
>>>> frustration.
>>>
>>> Of course they have a mathematical basis accounting for
>>> observations of the energies of decomposing nuclear particles
>>> thus we have subnuclear particles: i.e. various quarks, muons,
>>> photons and the particle assumed to be directly responsible for
>>> mass, the Higgs boson.
>>
>> I would bow to your superior knowledge, were it not for the fact that
>> "of course" is a statement of belief, not of fact.
>>
>> This doesn't mean some physics theories don't have mathematics that
>> /require/ different dimensions, though. Or at least are easier to use
>> if different dimensions are posited.
>>
>> When the Higgs boson was found, it is my understanding that a whole
>> lot theories died because it contradicted their predictions. Thus,
>> science marches on with the survivors.
>
> New evidence supports changes to and wholly new approximations of the
>observations. My knowledge may not be superior to your knowlege as I have
>been preoccupied not with the Super Collider results but with the
>mind-bending
>results of the astronomical time travel involved in finding earlier and
>earlier
>galactic-like formations back at the time which, if the Big Bang theory
>is somewhat
>correct, before the universe allowed the propagation of light or
>electromagnetic
>radiation to proceed.
I'm not sure what the first bit is saying. The initial report in
/Science News/ noted that several theories were now falsified.
That's how science works, BTW: falsified theories are dropped,
theories that survive the test keep on trucking. Of course, falsified
theories can also be adjusted in some cases to match the results of
the test ("match" here meaning "be compatible with"). And results can
always be refined.
The rest, so far, appears to be compatible with articles I have read
in /Science News/. Most of them report great excitement at the
results.
> The Universe may not be explicable to the minds attempting it because they
>are the products of the Universe. While clever tools both physical and
>mental are
>employed to study the present and past Universe we do not have as yet
>and may
>never have the capability to understand what the hell is going on in the
>fullest
>sense. If dimensions beyond our apprehension are involved then it
>becomes even
>harder to understand the Universe.
The trailer to /The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms/ has an
intelligent-looking white woman saying "perhaps there with things we
were never meant to know". I don't see that applying that attitude
(which is ultimately religious: it is always God who never meant us to
know or do various things when this sort of statement appears) is
either necessary or relevant here.
What is important is to keep in mind that we have exactly /one/
universe to study, and it is not something we created to study. This
does indeed make things difficult.
In one of his later novels, Asimov has a ship searching for the
original planet Earth. But there is a problem: all solar systems look
the same: rocky planets inward, gas giants outward, spaced -- well,
spaced pretty much as ours are.
The reason for this is that that /was/ the scientific theory at the
time the book was written: since we had only one Solar System to
study, every Solar System was taken to come to be in the same pattern.
What else could possibly happen. (In the book, the rings of Saturn
were claimed to be a unique marker for our Solar System).
When the first exoplanet was discovered some time later, this theory
died, at least insofar as it pretended to predict what other Solar
Systems were like. It still works as well as ever (or has been updated
to keep it working) for our Solar System, of course.
So let's put the cart /after/ the horse: first we make our
observations, then we correct our theory. Any other approach is
religion, not science.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
