[continued from previous message]   
      
   > > So, when you look at somebody like Fritz London, or,   
   > > Salam and Weinberg about asymptotic freedom, or,   
   > > Alain Aspect or otherwise about neutrinos, examples   
   > > of anti-reductionists, is that it's pretty much since   
   > > things like Minkowskian space-time that advances in   
   > > physics are courtesy it, then that applications   
   > > can quietly compute.   
   > >   
   > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antireductionism   
   > >   
   > >   
   > > Also "realism" is considered sort of necessary.   
   > > Now, most people would think "isn't physics all   
   > > about the real already", then when they find out   
   > > that on the theory side the "nominalists" and   
   > > "fictionalists" aren't "realists", and on the   
   > > experimental side that "instrumentalists" and   
   > > "observationalists" aren't "realists", here it's   
   > > that realists can use theory and experiment just fine.   
   >   
   > A catastrophic heap of pompous words, smashed together like a literary   
   > landfill, spewing nonsense in every direction.   
   >   
   > An overstuffed, brain?bending pile of highbrow words, strung together   
   > with all the elegance of a drunken squirrel.   
   >   
   > A grotesque mashup of scholarly terms, thrown together like confetti in a   
   > hurricane, making zero sense.   
   >   
   > A pretentious word?salad so jumbled it could make a dictionary weep.   
      
   One wonders how he does it.   
   Perhaps he reprogrammed a Kant generator?   
      
   Jan   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)