99
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 20:
Line 20: + + + + +
Debate:Is infinite regression ever valid as a form of reasoning, or acceptable as a way the universe works, or came to be? (view source)
Revision as of 23:26, March 8, 2007
, 23:26, March 8, 2007no edit summary
On fallacies: The preeminent fallacy committed by typical science researchers today is the idea of methodological-naturalism, I.E., You can make no appeal to any causation beyond the boundaries of observable nature. That is implicitly a biased point-of-view, and is a fundamentally flawed agenda if the actual goal is the pursuit of truth no matter where it leads--ostensibly the sovereign goal of science research itself (I know, I know...I'm probably just a naive idealist :^) All other current reasoning errors in science and philosophy research stem from this basic issue.
On fallacies: The preeminent fallacy committed by typical science researchers today is the idea of methodological-naturalism, I.E., You can make no appeal to any causation beyond the boundaries of observable nature. That is implicitly a biased point-of-view, and is a fundamentally flawed agenda if the actual goal is the pursuit of truth no matter where it leads--ostensibly the sovereign goal of science research itself (I know, I know...I'm probably just a naive idealist :^) All other current reasoning errors in science and philosophy research stem from this basic issue.
Finally, on the 'Bouncing-Universe': This ancient Hindu notion has pervaded much of modern philosophy, but it no longer has any real weight in science research, other wishing thinking and longing for 'the good old days'... :^) There was a research satellite named COBE (published in 1992), which provided 2 major findings in cosmology. The most important one for this issue is it showed definitively that the universe as a whole is a "perfect black-body radiator". These accuracy of the measurements leading to this finding have since been greatly enhanced, and strongly confirm this truth: The universe as a whole radiates all it's energy (100%). A little mechanics analysis will lead to this conclusion: There's no energy left over for a so-called 'bounce'.
Additionally, it is now known that not only is universe expanding, but that it's ''rate'' of expansion is '''increasing'''. If gravitational braking alone was the only action taking place, you would expect a ''decrease'' in it's rate, not an ''increase''. And, even accounting for Dark Matter, the universe is ''far'' short of the critical mass-density required to stop it's expansion, even if Dark Energy wasn't in fact the dominant factor.
--[[User:Knowthetruth|Knowthetruth]] 18:00, 8 March 2007 (EST)
--[[User:Knowthetruth|Knowthetruth]] 18:00, 8 March 2007 (EST)