Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > hy·po·thet·i·cal      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 awesomefiftyman
Joined: 12/1/2014
Msg: 1
hy·po·thet·i·cal Page 1 of 2    (1, 2)
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hypothetical
hy·po·thet·i·cal adjective \?hi-p?-'the-ti-k?l\
: involving or based on a suggested idea or theory : involving or based on a hypothesis
: not real : imagined as an example
 gingerosity
Joined: 12/10/2011
Msg: 2
view profile
History
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/12/2014 9:46:41 PM
im·pos·si·ble

Not able to occur, exist, or be done
 awesomefiftyman
Joined: 12/1/2014
Msg: 3
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/12/2014 9:51:08 PM
im·pos·si·ble

Not able to occur, exist, or be done


gingerosity,
you just touched on human time travel.
As it is not able to occur, exist or be done.

Although it makes for great mathematical physics concepts that imagine hypothetical situations that don't exist.
 gingerosity
Joined: 12/10/2011
Msg: 4
view profile
History
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/12/2014 9:56:28 PM
Why did I bold Not able?

Saying that something is not known to exist or occur says nothing as to its ability to exist or occur. Duh.
 awesomefiftyman
Joined: 12/1/2014
Msg: 5
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/12/2014 10:42:03 PM
Maybe you should have explained why you bolded "Not able" gingerosity.
As "Not able" or "unable" is synonymous with incapable.
Now incapable means: lacking the capacity, ability…

Now you are suggesting that we just don't currently have the ability to travel time? … because?
Suggesting that worm holes are not able to exist or occur?… because?
Duh?
I'm not impressed, as …

Oh no…. wait a second.
You're not even touching on time travel.
You're just being the Grammar Nazi again and tearing apart my English.
Fine Grammar Nazi, I see where you are going
BUT you know and everyone else knows exactly what I mean.

I am not leaving any notion open to the ability of time travel for humans to exist.

So since you're the Grammar Nazi here.

How would you title the statement that the ability for humans to travel time does not exist or will not occur?
Should the title read,

"The ability for Humans to time travel does not exist as it is only hypothetical"
 gingerosity
Joined: 12/10/2011
Msg: 6
view profile
History
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/13/2014 12:04:14 AM

How would you title the statement that the ability for humans to travel time does not exist or will not occur?

"Does not exist" (not seen within observational parameters to date) and "will not occur" (forbidden from happening at any time in the future of the universe according to our current understanding of its physics) are two very different things. That is the distinction that you still don't seem to get.

The function of a title is to advertise the thread contents in general, not to precisely spell out every nuance of your argument. That is your job. If you understand that something is forbidden from happening at any time in the future of the universe according to our current understanding of its physics, then you should say not only that it is impossible, but state your physics case for why that is so.

If you don't have a physics case, what do you have? Obfuscation and semantics?
 Moon_Rocket
Joined: 4/20/2012
Msg: 7
view profile
History
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/13/2014 2:47:56 AM
Gingerosity one, awesomefiftyman zero, and the winner is.............Oh my goodness...........it's Ginger, by a country mile! Say a few words for the camera pa-leeeze! Damn where's that dancing pickle when you need it!
 gingerosity
Joined: 12/10/2011
Msg: 8
view profile
History
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/13/2014 3:59:41 AM
Thanks, but the true winner is awesomefiftyman if he learns something.
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 9
view profile
History
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/13/2014 7:43:33 AM
I don't know about the rest of you, but I time travel regularly. I'm doing it right now, and I haven't even taken my shower yet.
 CarefreeBeauty
Joined: 5/30/2014
Msg: 10
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/13/2014 8:57:45 AM

I don't know about the rest of you, but I time travel regularly. I'm doing it right now, and I haven't even taken my shower yet.


Me too.
I like to go back in time and laugh at the stupid things my future self is going to say and do.
I'm such a hoot~
 awesomefiftyman
Joined: 12/1/2014
Msg: 11
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/13/2014 10:44:00 AM
Once again, following through your links andyaa,


http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothetico-deductive_model
The hypothetico-deductive model or method is a proposed description of scientific method.
According to it, scientific inquiry proceeds by formulating a hypothesis in a form that could conceivably be falsified by a test on observable data.
A test that could and does run contrary to predictions of the hypothesis is taken as a falsification of the hypothesis.
A test that could but does not run contrary to the hypothesis corroborates the theory. It is then proposed to compare the explanatory value of competing hypotheses by testing how stringently they are corroborated by their predictions.


So starting with this link you posted andyaa,
it appears that the hypothetico-deductive model or method relies on formulating a hypothesis.

The link you posted has a link for hypothesis:


A hypothesis (plural hypotheses) is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon.
For a hypothesis to be a scientific hypothesis, the scientific method requires that one can test it.
Scientists generally base scientific hypotheses on previous observations that cannot satisfactorily be explained with the available scientific theories.
Even though the words "hypothesis" and "theory" are often used synonymously, a scientific hypothesis is not the same as a scientific theory.
A working hypothesis is a provisionally accepted hypothesis proposed for further research.


Ooops, We can't test it.

The hypothesis link has a link for phenomenon:


A phenomenon , plural phenomena, is any observable occurrence. Phenomena are often, but not always, understood as 'appearances' or 'experiences'. These are themselves sometimes understood as involving qualia.

The term came into its modern philosophical usage through Immanuel Kant, who contrasted it with the noumenon. In contrast to a phenomenon, a noumenon is not directly accessible to observation.


Ooops, we don't have an observable occurrence..

The hypothesis link has a link for scientific theory:


http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation.[1][2] As with most (if not all) forms of scientific knowledge, scientific theories are inductive in nature and aim for predictive power and explanatory force.


Oops, we never had any worm hole in the natural world to test and confirm through observation and experimentation.

The scientific theory link has a link for Inductive:


http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_reasoning
Inductive reasoning (as opposed to deductive reasoning) is reasoning in which the premises seek to supply strong evidence for (not absolute proof of) the truth of the conclusion. While the conclusion of a deductive argument is supposed to be certain, the truth of the conclusion of an inductive argument is supposed to be probable, based upon the evidence given.


Ooops. We still have no evidence.


So, your position andyaa is a scientific method that formulated a hypothesis that can't be tested because it has no observable data.


Although all the math/physics of the working hypothesis is sound… it is still all just imaginary.
I'm good with that.
Einstein said that the imagination is more important than knowledge.
Awesome… possible/impossible… Currently that still leaves us in the land of imagination.

Maybe, if we might find some 1 million year old DNA of a flying dragon that can burp worm holes
and we bring it back to life…. man will travel time!

 awesomefiftyman
Joined: 12/1/2014
Msg: 12
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/14/2014 9:53:59 AM
IgorFrankensteen,

Check the context of hypothetical, in regards to time travel and andyaa's links he posted
 emotionalheat
Joined: 6/27/2007
Msg: 13
view profile
History
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/18/2014 8:07:01 PM
Let's try using hypothetical with regards to time travel. So, awesomefiftyman, hypothetically, in which direction would we travel to get to the past?
 awesomefiftyman
Joined: 12/1/2014
Msg: 14
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/18/2014 9:07:14 PM
Time has no direction
 Countryheart1967
Joined: 5/19/2014
Msg: 15
view profile
History
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/18/2014 9:39:19 PM
Are we not time travelers already, steadily marching into the future?
 emotionalheat
Joined: 6/27/2007
Msg: 16
view profile
History
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/18/2014 9:42:10 PM
I don't know that I would say time is non directional, awesomefifty. What about multi-dimensional? If that's the case then a wormhole might be like a tear in our time/space fabric or perhaps an intermittent doorway beyond our known dimension.

With no way of understanding the multi-dimensional nature of the internal time/space fabric that might exist past the wormhole opening we would have no way of navigating to a desired time and place within our own dimension.

Furthermore, there is likely to be nothing that we could create from the atoms that make up our physical reality that would protect our physical form while traveling in another dimension as we are designed to withstand and prosper here.

Any other hypothetical statements you might make?
 awesomefiftyman
Joined: 12/1/2014
Msg: 17
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/18/2014 9:50:25 PM
Um...you said nothing.
And if you read my posts, you'd see I already stated that humans cannot travel time.
 emotionalheat
Joined: 6/27/2007
Msg: 18
view profile
History
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/18/2014 10:25:15 PM

Um...you said nothing.
And if you read my posts, you'd see I already stated that humans cannot travel time.


I didn't intend to be disagreeable. I was actually trying to give some reasonable explanations of my own opinions as I had difficulty discerning yours from your sarcasm.

When I asked if you had any other hypotheticals I was asking if there was anything that I had missed. It's a conversation, I was attempting to keep it going.

I noticed a certain complaint in another thread about the inadequate communication in these forums. I'll try harder if you will.
 awesomefiftyman
Joined: 12/1/2014
Msg: 19
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/18/2014 10:44:48 PM
Well, at the moment I'm tired and will be going to sleep.

So no other hypotheticals.
I posted the definition of hypothetical to make the point to others who think that humans will travel time.
They didn't even follow through and read the links they were posting that they thought supported their view.
Their information actually supported my position.
 emotionalheat
Joined: 6/27/2007
Msg: 20
view profile
History
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/19/2014 7:47:42 AM
I'm just returning to these discussions after a long absence. It will take me a while to catch up. I did come across another thread in which the same issue about 'hypothetical' was addressed. I added some further comment there with hope of clarifying why all hypotheses are valid when first examined and what helps to make a hypothesis a philosophical or scientific topic for discussion.

I hope you find it as I don't have time at the moment to look back for the thread. I can post that later if someone wants to know.

Thanks
 awesomefiftyman
Joined: 12/1/2014
Msg: 21
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/19/2014 9:47:37 AM

clarifying why all hypotheses are valid when first examined


Well, given that the hypotheses we were discussing are logical mathematical equations that support an "imagined" object and/or action,
The hypothesis can still be valid
but the object and/or action that was "imagined" may never exist.


what helps to make a hypothesis a philosophical or scientific topic for discussion


Look forward to discussion. :)
 robaustralia
Joined: 12/1/2014
Msg: 22
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/24/2014 5:49:27 PM

Well, given that the hypotheses we were discussing are logical mathematical equations that support an "imagined" object and/or action,
The hypothesis can still be valid
but the object and/or action that was "imagined" may never exist


We'll using your logic, the hypothesis that the Sun will one day turn into a Red Giant means the Sun doesn't exist. (Pfft)
 awesomefiftyman
Joined: 12/1/2014
Msg: 23
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/24/2014 7:07:36 PM
Um, Robaustralia,

the sun is not an "imagined" object.
 CTRLvector
Joined: 9/21/2014
Msg: 24
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/25/2014 12:12:16 AM
Theory and hypothesis involve research, and protocol. And that leads to science. Trouble shooting complexity through practical study. Ever heard the saying "down to a science" to the point that you can test for validity by recreating the results with statistical accuracy. That is the process of hypothesis turned science.

Literal definition does not always apply in context to question or application as conducted in reality.

I think you should consider attribution/conjunction/common-sense. In either event.... science beotch. But good for you, for learning new words. Golden star.
 awesomefiftyman
Joined: 12/1/2014
Msg: 25
hy·po·thet·i·cal
Posted: 12/25/2014 12:34:59 AM
Late arrival CTRLvector but thanks for your input.

No problem with you repeating saying "down to a science" to the point that you can test for validity by recreating the results with statistical accuracy.

Tell that to the Kool-aid drinkers who believe in human time travellers.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > hy·po·thet·i·cal