Nobody said that physicists don't have valid reasons to form a postulate. In fact they are only made when the evidence in support of the postualte is overwhelming.
Yes. They are different things and are related. What's your point?
All I see so far is that you have a poor understanding of what a law of physics is and how they come to be. You've incorrectly concluded that I was stating or implying the philosphy is superior than physics when in fact I made to such claim and nothing I wrote can be read to imply that. Your claim that I implied that philosophy was superior to physics is meaningless. While you have meant something by it is another thing altogether.
More nonsense. Apparently you think that the term "observe" as used in the field of physics means to sense with one or more of the human sense - that is incorrect.
re I didn't realize stating the truth would be considered an insult.
When you post a message like
and then imply that you're not insulting someone then you should stop posting and learn more about what is considered flaming.
Since you're use of logic and philosphy are that of a freshman in highschool I'm not about to bother with you again.
I highly suggest that you actually pick up a book on the philosophy of science and learn exacly why what you've posted is as wrong as it is.
When you've changed your mind and decide that you want to discuss physics in a more adult manner, rather than insulting someone because you think your smarter, then try posting again.
- I think we can do without tenzin's insults. Please inform him that such behaviour is unacceptable here. Thank you.