Bankrupting Physics Best Quotes: Hempel's Paradox

[@Tordvergar]

Great point about Guth! One wonders, though, if for Guth this was not an April First Joke, at least to some extent. After all, it's fairly widely posited that Inflation is quite ad-hoc.

[@burthurt8365]

Always refreshing hearing common sense and logic applied to your presentations . A rare commodity in Physics these days . Kudos Sir

[@jackdragon5353]

Yes. Magnetic monopoles fit perfectly into Maxwell's equations and make them completely symmetric. But they are not observed. Dr Hossenfelder speaks of an "ugly universe", and I think she is right.

[@NicholsonNeisler-fz3gi]

Not real for reasons we don’t understand yet. I’ve never understood them myself

[@Magic4C]

Logically, you have an awesome Office....

[@Kraflyn]

yeah, the office has quite a view, doesn't it? :3

[@foogott]

Lavalier Wind Muff 2 Pack costs 6.99 here in the states. That must be one hell of a vat tax or tariff you have over there.

[@CosteCosmology-lf2yc]

There are a lot of assertions that are similar to the "a white shoe is evidence that all ravens are black." One such assertion is that: no current explanation for how light can lose energy as it travels through space -- and becomes red-shifted -- means that inflation theory is true. However, the following explanation for cosmic redshift is consistent with conservation of momentum, conservation of energy, General Relativity (stress-energy tensor) and only relies on the additional concept that Minkowski Space Time (e.g., what can be known when) can create an asymmetry capable of creating the observed Cosmic Redshift. See the APS abstract in the KZbin description to this video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qmjReomgpK-pp9E (Cosmic Redshift Explained by Minkowski Space-Time and General Relativity).

[@pacman-x3m]

96% of the observable universe, cannot be observed… Houston we have a problem

[@rogerscottcathey]

Your outdoors video's audio is . . . 🙁 terrible

[@Peter-o9n6p]

This is not new feedback. Alex has been disregarding these concerns for many many years. He is clearly well pleased with his format. Mountains and lakes are a more important part of his message than being clearly heard.

[@rogerscottcathey]

@Peter-o9n6p : Yeah? So disregard likes and full viewings for insistence on using poor equipment and audience incomprehension just to be outside . . . 😐

[@ZeroOskul]

​@@rogerscottcatheyYes. He disregards it. That is why he has not changed the format. Buy the book if you want to know what it says without distorting the author's voice.

[@rogerscottcathey]

@@ZeroOskul : I don't think he's that arrogant. Note his latest assessment of another KZbin creator.

[@pieterpost3606]

Audio is awfull... But the visuals is awesome...

[@Tubake1]

In the general theory of logic, the implication concept "if..then.." has the truth value of the well-known pattern 1011, but should be 10 - - to correctly depict the conditionality of natural language implication, i.e. it is only if the premise is true that the implication has a truth value, otherwise it lacks truth value. It is on this incompleteness that Hempel's paradox is based.

[@Sonnell]

I have never observed a human who never fail in its observations and logic..... :)

[@seankellycrypto]

Which lake is that ? Lake Hallstatt in Austria ?

[@starfire0007]

Very interesting says the albino raven.

[@oliverM24]

I might have understood it wrongly but I think that your shirt is a raven, no? But I havn´t seen the colors of your shoes....

[@markwrede8878]

This is the inconsistency of arithmetic. Poor logic attends membership requirements between multiplication and addition, which has none. The use of "all" may likewise be deceptive in registry of membership. If the registry attends the statements, the unreason is tamed, but the complexity of proof increases.

[@guillermo3412]

let me see if i got this straight, you think that arithmetic is inconsistent because there are systems such as "PEMDAS" pertained to how we order basic operations? cause if thats what you mean let me tell you youre wrong, even if you got rid of arbitrary systems such as "BODMAS" or whatever which real mathematicians dont really use you can just use parentheses to indicate the order of operations in a certain expression, which only serves to make it more complete.

[@markwrede8878]

@@guillermo3412 Godel's religious notions prompted him to find arithmetic to be incomplete, however, the membership issue demonstrates inconsistency.

[@mindsquatch]

@guillermo3412 i think what's being said is you can't apply the nature of something to something else simply because it exists to be identified. This is actually quite an idea... basically, if our observations of cause and effect render both indistinguishable, nobody knows wtf they're talking about - a position I reflect from more and more upon... it's bonkers, mate - absurd. You can't explain things without yourself in the picture. The more we try, the more paradoxical things become = multiplicity of the inadequate.

[@markwrede8878]

@@mindsquatch Definitions are not objects but procedures of the mind in time. The trend may be observed in the territory, but the boundary cannot be distinguished. Neither arithmetic nor geometry can deliver the infinite regression of causality.

[@guillermo3412]

@@markwrede8878 excuse me but youre not explaining anything here, ive still yet to know what you mean by your OP, since im not familiar with the terms youre using, it seems youre sort of using terms that are not standard or inadequate for this discussion so i ask you to please clarify what you actually meant.

[@jonathanhockey9943]

In summary, all ravens lives matter

[@markszlazak]

This is just another version of Hume’s problem of induction and confirmation theory.

[@redshiftdrift]

What about non-observation of dark matter?

[@leonhardtkristensen4093]

All Ravens are Black. All Swans are white. That last bit was until I came to Australia where that Swans are black. That just shows that even an observation that appear to be correct may not be. That is also the same with measurements and calculations. We can only say that it appears to be and has shown to be say 99+ % right but what about if something changes just a little or maybe a lot. We are often making formula's for things or occurrences in the ranges where we can do the measurements easily and then expect it to be the same for a much bigger range. That may be far from the case. Also some times we use formula's developed for some thing different but looking similar and expecting it will be correct. That in my opinion may be very dangerous.

[@zachariaszut]

What about Kvitravn?

[@ZeroOskul]

About 1 in 30,000 birds is born with leucism, which makes them appear white, so about 1 in 30,000 ravens are white, because all ravens are birds and all are born, and 1 in 30,000 are born with leucism.

[@nightwaves3203]

At least he didn't say they are dark matter. Gotta leave it to the ravens to say that maybe. But then the raven would say, what was what was never more never more the light. A black raven is what you get for an observation. How is that for cheeky. I'd say he is stuck but knows it's simple. kzbin.info/www/bejne/Zl60ZJamaMijbpo

[@green_dog8960]

I'm sorry, but I don't agree that "Everything that is black is not a raven" is equivalent to "All ravens are black". The statement "Everything that is NOT black is not a raven" would be the equivalent through double negation. Was the word "not" edited out, or was it similar to the word "a" in Neil Armstrong's "small step for (a) man"?

[@SuperMenders]

warum lösen Sie eigentlich nicht einfach die Probleme der modernen Physik, wenn alle etablierten Wissenschaftler so unfähig sind?