🚀 go-pugleaf

On Aug 6, 9:34 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 6, 3:00 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 6, 7:45 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 6, 2:08 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Pentcho, if something actually happens in nature -- if it is
> > > > experimentally observed -- then it isn't a mystery. It is a fact. The
> > > > circumstance that you are surprised by the fact does not make it a
> > > > mystery. The circumstance that you cannot understand how that can be
> > > > does not make it a mystery.
>
> > > Of course trapping a 80m long pole inside a 40m long barn is a fact
> > > Clever Draper - what else could it be? But there is also a "disparity
> > > between common experience and scientific knowledge" and this makes
> > > such facts difficult to understand:
>
> > That is certainly true. And as Brian Greene notes, this is something
> > that physicists continue to struggle with -- adjusting the "common
> > sense" to be more in line with demonstrated fact. Nature doesn't give
> > a damn what makes good "common sense". It does what it does. It is the
> > physicist's job to figure out what nature REALLY DOES, not to figure
> > out what makes good, common sense, or what is easily understandable.
>
> Correct Clever Draper but if you replace "nature" with "Einsteiniana"
> you will be Absolutely Correct:

No, sir. What I described about science is true in how it works with
nature in general, not just with relativity or -- as you call it --
"Einsteiniana". In *all* cases, where nature demonstrates itself to be
in conflict with common sense, it is common sense that bends, not
nature.

>
> Clever Draper (Absolutely Correct): "Einsteiniana doesn't give a damn
> what makes good "common sense". It does what it does. It is the
> physicist's job to figure out what Einsteiniana REALLY DOES, not to
> figure out what makes good, common sense, or what is easily
> understandable."
>
> Yet there is a suspicion Clever Draper. Judging from Divine Albert's
> 1954 confession, perhaps in its fight against common sense
> Einsteiniana has gone too far:

There is never "too far". Nature is what it is, as shown in
experiment. If nature is very, very strange, then that's what it is.

>
> http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/pdf/files/975547d7-2d00-433a-b7e3-4a...
> John Stachel: "It is not so well known that there was "another
> Einstein," who from 1916 on was skeptical about the CONTINUUM as a
> foundational element in physics..." Albert Einstein: "I consider it
> entirely possible that physics cannot be based upon the field concept,
> that is on CONTINUOUS structures. Then nothing will remain of my whole
> castle in the air, including the theory of gravitation, but also
> nothing of the rest of contemporary physics."
>
> What do YOU think Clever Draper: Has Einsteiniana gone too far in its
> fight against common sense?
>
> Pentcho Valev
> pva...@yahoo.com