Einstein or Newton

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by Toehammer [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I was sad to see this thread devolve into religion/science garbage. It is always bizarre to me to see two things that can have such a beautiful effect on people's lives be pit against each other, when to be honest, they are by definition mutually exclusive. Two of the greatest achievements of man, science and religion, have both helped immensely to move humanity away from troglodytic warring nomadic tribes into organized, principled nations. I don't subscribe to a religion, but there is nothing more obnoxious than an evangelical atheist.

Good post, inclined to agree on Faraday needs more credit if for no other reason than the great boon that electrolysis is to humanity ^^

[Toehammer]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Good post, inclined to agree on Faraday needs more credit if for no other reason than the great boon that electrolysis is to humanity ^^

Every time I come up with a new idea in my own research (nanoparticle self-assembly/electrical charging/synthesis) I have to make sure Faraday didn't do it first. Faraday's conceptualization of "lines of force" (fields) essentially postulated non-infinite propagation velocities, i.e. no "action at a distance". This might be the true foundation of all modern physics. It is no coincidence that Einstein had pictures of 3 physicists on his wall to draw inspiration from: Newton, Maxwell, and Faraday.

Maxwell was so impressive. Read Freeman Dyson's article "Why is Maxwell's Theory so hard to Understand?" http://www.clerkmaxwellfoundation.or...manArticle.pdf Maxwell held Faraday in the highest regard as well. Dyson's article points out something very important: that scientists should blow their own trumpets, and as he says: "If Maxwell had had an ego like Galileo or Newton, he would have made sure that his work was not ignored. Maxwell was as great a scientist as Newton and a far more agreeable character..." Read the article; it explains eloquently how fields and the quantum mechanical wave function are just as difficult to understand because we can't actually measure them directly. I honestly believe if Faraday was around during the development of quantum mechanics he would have come up with a better formulation for the wave function than we have now, just like he did with fields, which is what made Maxwell's work possible. yeah... not to mention that Faraday had unquantifiable influence on modern industry...

post too long, abort!

[AzzarTheGod]

Good posts past 2 pages.

Faraday was the dogs dog.

[Chaboo_Cleric]

Originally Posted by Toehammer [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Every time I come up with a new idea in my own research (nanoparticle self-assembly/electrical charging/synthesis) I have to make sure Faraday didn't do it first. Faraday's conceptualization of "lines of force" (fields) essentially postulated non-infinite propagation velocities, i.e. no "action at a distance". This might be the true foundation of all modern physics. It is no coincidence that Einstein had pictures of 3 physicists on his wall to draw inspiration from: Newton, Maxwell, and Faraday.

Maxwell was so impressive. Read Freeman Dyson's article "Why is Maxwell's Theory so hard to Understand?" http://www.clerkmaxwellfoundation.or...manArticle.pdf Maxwell held Faraday in the highest regard as well. Dyson's article points out something very important: that scientists should blow their own trumpets, and as he says: "If Maxwell had had an ego like Galileo or Newton, he would have made sure that his work was not ignored. Maxwell was as great a scientist as Newton and a far more agreeable character..." Read the article; it explains eloquently how fields and the quantum mechanical wave function are just as difficult to understand because we can't actually measure them directly. I honestly believe if Faraday was around during the development of quantum mechanics he would have come up with a better formulation for the wave function than we have now, just like he did with fields, which is what made Maxwell's work possible. yeah... not to mention that Faraday had unquantifiable influence on modern industry...

post too long, abort!

That was a pretty entertaining post , lol. I'll send a retort when I get home, on your knighting for Faraday

[AzzarTheGod]

Originally Posted by Toehammer [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Dyson's article points out something very important: that scientists should blow their own trumpets, and as he says: "If Maxwell had had an ego like Galileo or Newton, he would have made sure that his work was not ignored. Maxwell was as great a scientist as Newton and a far more agreeable character..."

Indicating sperglords are good (i.e. Galileo/Newton).

I feel like there is less respect for sperglords than ever in 2016 because it is an inherently disrespectful society. Academia exists but it is no longer as respected as it was by the $$$ and the magnates/oligarchy who place more emphasis on vice and ability to buy vice. Society has become one big advertisement for business/finance/law and respect for academics has fallen to the wayside.

This seems like a step backwards culturally from the time of Newton, as it takes strong egos away from science (strong egos solve problems, strong egos invent cures) and puts them in other areas where they can attain what society has advertised.

[AzzarTheGod]

Originally Posted by big_ole_jpn [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Religion w/o science is blind. Science w/o religion is gay.

damn this radio edit is woke

[Ahldagor]

To put it in guppy terms about the past two posts, they're third eye woke.

[Daywolf]

For your jumbled wall of text, it strikes me as odd, I'll go back over it this evening when I have time to address some of it and capsulate a readable reply.

Originally Posted by Toehammer [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Why do you say also we are so small.

But for this, it strikes me as really odd. We're not even a type 1 civilization. Not even close to a type 1 civilization yet. It's really really odd that you try to counter even this if truly being into science, then speak of star dust as some counter argument. Are we just arguing for arguing sake now? This is mainstream stuff, and it's seriously odd it seemed to go over your head as well.

Originally Posted by Ahldagor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

To put it in guppy terms about the past two posts, they're third eye woke.

The irony in that is you are using an ancient religious term. This is from Saturn worship, the third eye. Often represented as a circle with a dot in the center. But it's not just of the ancient religion/s, it's still observed to this day by various groups and sects. One example of this symbol, examine the image on the back of your one dollar bill. Symbolism is very prevalent in our modern culture, as it was in ancient cultures, there are all sorts of symbols of the ancient religions if you understand what to look for.

[Ahldagor]

Originally Posted by Daywolf [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The irony in that is you are using an ancient religious term. This is from Saturn worship, the third eye. Often represented as a circle with a dot in the center. But it's not just of the ancient religion/s, it's still observed to this day by various groups and sects. One example of this symbol, examine the image on the back of your one dollar bill. Symbolism is very prevalent in our modern culture, as it was in ancient cultures, there are all sorts of symbols of the ancient religions if you understand what to look for.

That's not irony, and Vedics predate the Roman empire. I'm curious how you're going to interpret very defined history to frame your argument. Read Pythagoras?

[entruil]

Originally Posted by Ahldagor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That's not irony, and Vedics predate the Roman empire. I'm curious how you're going to interpret very defined history to frame your argument. Read Pythagoras?

failed... more time is given...