/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12486539
Did you miss the giant explosion?

>>10523840
>Closed
>Closed twice.

Ad hominem, see pic related.

>Get a neuroscientist.

Enjoy the buffet of writings and insights from a neuroscientist, a neurosurgeon who actually had an NDE, and a neuropsychiatrist:

https://www.salon.com/2012/04/29/near_death_revisited/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbkgj5J91hE
https://skeptiko.com/64-near-death-experience-research-dr-peter-fenwick/

>>10396037

>Not science.

Science is a methodological process of discovering truths about reality. Insofar as science is an objective process of discovery, it is, and must be, metaphysically neutral. Insofar as science is not metaphysically neutral, but instead weds itself to a particular metaphysical theory, such as materialism, it cannot be an objective process for discovery. There is much confusion on this point, because many people equate science with materialist metaphysics, and phenomena that fall outside the scope of such metaphysics, and hence cannot be explained in physical terms, are called "unscientific." This is a most unfortunate usage of the term. For if souls and spirits are in fact a part of reality, and science is conceived epistemologically as a systematic investigation of reality, then there is no reason why science cannot devise appropriate methods to investigate souls and spirits. But if science is defined in terms of materialist metaphysics, then, if souls and spirits are real, science, thus defined, will not be able to deal with them. But this would not be because souls and spirits are unreal, but rather because this definition of science in terms of materialist metaphysics has semantically excluded nonphysical realities from its scope.

Peter and Elizabeth Fenwick used the term "science" in this metaphysical sense when they wrote:

So far we've taken a largely scientific, and therefore a rather limited view of the NDE. We've been looking at mechanism, and almost every thing we have said has been based on the assumption that the NDE takes place in or is constructed by the brain. We've confined 'mind' to the brain because, scientifically,... we have no other option. When the brain dies, the mind dies; the scientific view does not allow for the possibility of a soul, or for any form of personal survival after death. It is only by looking at some non-scientific views that we might find a wider explanation of the NDE.... (Fenwick and Fenwick,

>>9544923
>>9544925
I think there is a large issue philosophically when you avidly act as a proponent to an non-empirical theory or one which is notorious for negative-results, for an empirical science.

>>9419015
I believe in his sharp mind. He has the touch of Midas.

>>9419034
>No one is impressed because you add a smug anime girl to your posts
But it is the ultimate debating method.

>>9419090
I haven't read his art book yet, but I'm planning to take a look at it later. Have you read the Topological Picture Book by Francis? It had some nice pictures.

>>9399173

>>9128525

>>9123300
>>9123328

>Now that science has found this

???????????????

Do you read the link you provided me ?


By the way, you have a very romantic (simplistic) vision of what biology and genes are. In reality, biology is very very very very complex.

>>9116898

Depend of your age. Women (girls) before 20y are more superficial. They like muscles and pleasant faces. After 20y, they want brains.

Pi is a boolean

>>8568047
I would argue that as the ability to measure smaller areas of reality increases, we will always find smaller "particles". However at the moment, I would go so far as to say that whatever quantum elements comprise quantum wave fluctuations in a vacuum, that right there might be where one would find your smallest particle.

Also if you subscribe to string theory, whatever comprises strings might be your smallest particle.

>>8568552

>>8433424
>Climate change, environmental destruction,
Are reasonable things that could lead to civilization being destroyed.

Everything else you have past that is hogwash as nuclear weapons creates MAD, and you can see the nuclear weapon thread we have up as other pointed out about its use. Capitalism is a wavy economic system, but it functions fine though in any economic system crashes are to be expected.

>Posting Iran deal
Anon.

>>8433432
This is nothing like that, Anon. Have a pyramid. For my reaction look at the very top.

>>8397426

>>8050145
Mandatory

>>7966118
this is very sound advice