/sci/ - Science & Math

The scientific method is correct, just look at the evidence.

>>4344938

/thread

your mom is fat because i said so

>>4344935

>mfw I never thought of that one

>>4344938

>did this on a slow board
>I shouldn't be impressed
>yet I am

Color me temporarily amused.

Circular logic is incorrect because you can only prove it's correct with circular logic.

these things we can't explain the existence of are actually self-emergent

In biological systems self-organization is a process in which pattern at the global level of a system emerges solely from numerous interactions among the lower-level components of the system. Moreover, the rules specifying interactions among the system's components are executed using only local information, without reference to the global pattern.

One method to building molecular assemblers is to mimic evolutionary processes employed by biological systems. Biological evolution proceeds by random variation combined with culling of the less-successful variants and reproduction of the more-successful variants. Production of complex molecular assemblers might be evolved from simpler systems since "A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked. . . . A complex system designed from scratch never works and can not be patched up to make it work. You have to start over, beginning with a system that works." However, most published safety guidelines include "recommendations against developing ... replicator designs which permit surviving mutation or undergoing evolution".

"Every resultant is either a sum or a difference of the co-operant forces; their sum, when their directions are the same -- their difference, when their directions are contrary. Further, every resultant is clearly traceable in its components, because these are homogeneous and commensurable. It is otherwise with emergents, when, instead of adding measurable motion to measurable motion, or things of one kind to other individuals of their kind, there is a co-operation of things of unlike kinds. The emergent is unlike its components insofar as these are incommensurable, and it cannot be reduced to their sum or their difference."

God exists because the Bible says so.

The Bible is true because God wrote it.

>>4344943
Nice. I thought my 4chanx was fucking broken for like 45 seconds you bastard.

>>4344935
Although strong emergence is logically possible, it is uncomfortably like magic. How does an irreducible but supervenient downward causal power arise, since by definition it cannot be due to the aggregation of the micro-level potentialities? Such causal powers would be quite unlike anything within our scientific ken. This not only indicates how they will discomfort reasonable forms of materialism. Their mysteriousness will only heighten the traditional worry that emergence entails illegitimately getting something from nothing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aX6XMIldkRU

>>4344979

How do people get away with upchucking this gibberish and promoting it as some kind of science?

(defun a()
(a)
)

(setq a (a))

a

>>4344937
Fuck.

>>4344979
don't worry, epiphenomenal causes only have epiphenomenal effects

>>4345024
fuck that gay language

>>4344979
>>4344979
>>4344979
>>4344979
>>4344979
>>4344979
>>4344979
>>4344979

I was in a debate with someone who writes like this once. Do you know how hard it is it debate with these kinds of people? It makes me want to stab myself and swim in my own blood. People should write simply, coherently, and precisely.

This post is dubs because I say so.

>>4344938

>>4345166
I feel you. Those people are the worst...they seem more concerned with how many syllables they can pack into a sentence rather than actually conveying any meaning or thought.
>>4345008
Simple, big words with sciencey sounds are SCIENCE. star-trek said so.

generally people will tend to judge others by the syllable density in the sentences they say or write.
The awesome thing is that you can tell when one of these people don't know what they're talking about when you "argue" with them using simpler language. When you are saying the exact same thing they are and they are trying to say "No no no, you don't get it! (incoherent vocabulary word of the day jarble here)." That's how you know they learned vocabulary words instead of the actual concepts, theories, or such.

>>4345248

Yeah, well, why don't you stop discomforting reasonable forms merely for supervenience of microlevel potentialities.

The universe exists because the universe exists, or something else caused its existence. Now that something either caused itself, or something caused it. Inducting, we conclude that at one point an "object" (loosely defined) has existed which necessitates its own creation.

>>4345286
something either caused itself

yes, this apparent problem of cause and effect

>>4344935

But that's not circular logic.