|
|
|
|
|
| What if we are wrong
Posted: 7/29/2009 10:31:40 AM |
The circumference of a circle is two times the radius times pi. It was the first mark, and it is cherished among my few truths for that reason. Imagine what would happen to my beliefs if you could prove it false? I might overcrowd the beliefs board with another mark.
Get ready for a nervous breakdown (or an epiphany)...In non-euclidean geometry, C ≠ 2 π r becomes true (picture a circle drawn on a sphere for instance; then c < 2 π r where the measure of "r" is taken on the surface of the sphere. The typing is a bit much, and the proof a bit technical, so it's probably better to do some googling. It may even be (I'm actually pretty sure) that what we call euclidean geometry is just an illusion born of scale (in much the same way that the earth looks flat to us at this scale) in terms of "real" spacetime, so it may actually be a more accurate measure to take C ~ 2 π r ("~" is "approximately") in general "real" life.
So did I "shatter" your worldview? 
If so, beer is the great normalizer...I highly recommend it...  | |
|
| What if we are wrong
Posted: 7/29/2009 12:13:04 PM |
So my question in this thread....what would the rest of you do if your most cherished "truth" turned out to be wrong?
You mean, if someone were to tell me, that what I actually experienced, at the moment of my husband's death, was in fact, a momentary disorganization in the internuncial net, brought about by prolonged stress and insomnia, that within the network of intermediary neurons a synapse lapse occurred, and that there was an elevation spike in the secretions produced by the adrenal and pituitary glands? That what I actually experienced was an engagement of the sympathetic nervous system, stimulating a moment of fusion between the pons, brain stem and the cerebral cortex, causing a chemical reaction that induced hallucinatory sensations and a feeling of hyper awareness?
A depressing thought.
I prefer to believe that, at the exact moment of his death, his soul washed over mine (every hair on my body stood up and I smelled flowers), and whispered "Everything will be okay."
To believe otherwise, would be to reduce a person's life to a momentary existence, which can be disregarded and unnoticed, and therefore rendered obsolete, except for the memories that exist within the people who knew that person, minds. And that would be unbearable. (JustDukky, will you please share your beer?)
Who wants to believe that they are obsolete?
2hi-iq-4u has an excellent point, there is a distinction between a "truth" and a "belief".
I also believe in "personal truth", which is based upon experience.
Is there such a big leap between my own experience and an unmedicated schizophrenic's whose delusions produce very "real" like sensations, including sensory information that within their own minds, support their experience and interpretation of the world around them?
Probably not.
However, it may depend on the conclusions one draws, and how they may implement them in their life...
We are dealing with concepts based on abstraction, and therefore purely subjective, interpretive, and inconclusive.
Anyway I digress...
If my personal truth was "disproved", I would definitely have a nervous breakdown...
But I would get over it. And still remain a humanist. And a reckless optimistic... | |
|
| What if we are wrong
Posted: 7/29/2009 12:33:28 PM | Depends whether it's a positive belief or a negative one. In the same year I gave up being agnostic to become an atheist and I gave up the belief that climate scientists who believe the climate is warming because of CO2 are 100% correct.
Three things happened:
1. I was no longer connected with my peers on a shared belief, so I was ostracized to a certain extent = Bad
2. I had no God to turn to = A real void
3. I did feel a bit of relief over the change in heart over CO2. I had been worried about the coast disappearing over the next few years and our being hit by fierce tornadoes and hurricanes. Those things just aren't true, so the immediacy of the concern has lessened. = Good | |
|
| What if we are wrong
Posted: 7/29/2009 1:16:12 PM |
But I would get over it. And still remain a humanist. And a reckless optimistic...
In that case, have a beer... 
We need a few (quite a few) optimistic humanists in the world, and you have a lot of work coming up, so have a cool one on me and relax for awhile...
...Then get off yer ass & get back to work!! If you think I'm gonna try to clean up this sh¡thole of a planet all by my lonesome, you're nuttier than I am!! Besides...I'm too drunk to do much right now...somebody has to take my shift. | |
|
| What if we are wrong
Posted: 7/29/2009 1:49:15 PM |
....what would the rest of you do if your most cherished "truth" turned out to be wrong?
What did they do to Galileo? Do you really think we would act any differently today? Human nature is what it is.  | |
|
| What if we are wrong
Posted: 7/29/2009 2:14:41 PM |
Human nature is what it is.
The masses might have even been receptive to his ideas if he'd been allowed to talk about them. It was the authorities of the day, the ones who relied on Church dogma to keep the people in line that feared Galileo might speak of what he knew. If they could be proven wrong about anything, there was a danger of people questioning what other lies their "infallible leaders" had told them. It was the authorities, not the masses that censured him; and they did it in the entirely rational interest of preserving power, not because it was human nature to mock and doubt that which they don't understand. Quite the opposite, it is human nature to often recognize logical, rational truth and it was that fear of relevations of truth that left the authorities of the day terrified. | |
|
| What if we are wrong
Posted: 7/29/2009 2:24:45 PM | One thing that humans generally need is scientific proof and when the outcome is still too difficult for them to accept, they poke holes in the scientific process that proved the outcome.
The "truth" if you are referring to our beliefs (or lack thereof) is highly relevant for me in terms of how I would feel. If some of my beliefs were proven to be truths (facts), I would most likely react this way "Holy shit, I knew it....." If some of my beliefs were proven to be false, I would be one of the ones refusing to accept it....hence is the nature of beliefs.
I expect facts to be changed as new information/processes become available to us humans.....I accept that we are indeed quite arrogant for the most part. We are often quick to say Aha, see it is a proven fact...only to have that fact proven false later on, but for many, they simply don't make the connection that they were wrong before and may well be wrong this time also.
Facts are great...they give order and substance to the universe. Beliefs give meaning to our view of the universe. | |
|
| What if we are wrong
Posted: 7/29/2009 2:26:30 PM |
So did I "shatter" your worldview?
If so, beer is the great normalizer...I highly recommend it...
Not likely, unless you can find a place in "the world" where non-euclidian(sp) geometry has been proven. It couldn't shatter a "worldview" if it hasn't. And besides, I would only have to erase the mark on the"truth" chalkboard, and draw a new one on the beliefs board. (After I have a beer) | |
|
| What if we are wrong
Posted: 7/29/2009 3:05:46 PM |
Not likely, unless you can find a place in "the world" where non-euclidian(sp) geometry has been proven. It couldn't shatter a "worldview" if it hasn't.
It depends on what you consider proof. The theory of Relativity is contingent on spacetime being non-Euclidean in nature. So, whatever you believe or consider proof, either both go on the "belief" side of your board (How can you simultaneously believe two things that contradict each other?), or throw one of them in the trash as untrue and unbelievable (which should clear some space on your "belief" board for more stuff).
I'm not trying to start a fight mind you...Just trying to help you organize your board before I start seeing double... | |
|
| What if we are wrong
Posted: 7/29/2009 7:14:35 PM | The theory of Relativity is contingent on spacetime being non-Euclidean in nature. So, whatever you believe or consider proof, either both go on the "belief" side of your board (How can you simultaneously believe two things that contradict each other?), or throw one of them in the trash as untrue and unbelievable (which should clear some space on your "belief" board for more stuff).
There is plenty of room on the truth board, and currently I have the formula for devising pi from the circumference of a circle in euclidian dimensions, and the existence of gravity.
Relativity isn't even on my beliefs board, especially the part you mentioned. I still believe that time is measured by space. Light propagates it doesn't travel. I am more into strings not "special" theories. E doesn't even exactly equal MC squared. There are other variables, but the overwhelming significance of the E=MC(^2) part of the equation often makes those other variables moot. Close only counts in horseshoes and atomic weaponry. Not on my truth board. | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
