Uncovering the Truth: A Physics Site Dedicated to Evidence-Based Discussions

In summary, this conversation is discussing the importance of grounding discussions on this physics site in the principles of physics and using evidence and reason to support claims about the past. The analogy of a crime scene is used to illustrate the difference between using scientific methods and faith or personal beliefs to understand a phenomenon. The importance of objective investigation in science is emphasized.
  • #1
dad
14
0
"this is a physics site. As such, discussions must be grounded in physics."

To be grounded in physics only, we must stick to the present, where we know, and not just guess that physics applied. Unless we had some real evidence or proof that the state of the universe was the same in the past. We don't. Therefore to claim it was is religion. Is that really what this site is about? I mean really??
Are not claims of the early universe built into astronomy inseparable from the "science"?? Perhaps a fresh look is needed to see if they really are inseparable? After all, science is not some priesthood, seeking to defend just it's beliefs, is it?! There is no proof the past was physical only, as the present. Is there? If so, where is it!? Can you defend it with reason, and evidence, or only by closing a thread with iseas such as this? We shall see.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2
This is going to be an interesting thread, with lots of insults and expletives flying around. :biggrin:

But you are right to a point. We can never be sure of anything. However, I think the laws of physics would not have changed over any period of time. If they did change, they would not be laws. We can use this to estimate the state of the universe in the past.
 
  • #3
Electron17 said:
This is going to be an interesting thread, with lots of insults and expletives flying around. :biggrin:
I have no need to insult.
But you are right to a point. We can never be sure of anything. However, I think the laws of physics would not have changed over any period of time. If they did change, they would not be laws.

But I do not say that they did change, since they came to be. The question is, when was that? Was it really at the beginning, or could it have been at some point afterwards, and how would we know??
We can use this to estimate the state of the universe in the past.
Only if we know it was the same in the deep past!. But, the problem is, we don't. So, how is it science to say we do?
 
  • #4
The simplest explanation is that the laws of physics have not changed (even in the "deep past"). This is both obvious (to propose change would require introduction of a parameter for the direction of change) and supported by all our historical records of mechanics and astronomical observations.

It is science to look (in the present) at historical records or starlight (which, according to current evidence, allows us to observe the past universe), and to extrapolate.. We'd generally call it "philosophy" to ask what could have happened "outside" or "before" the domain of the observable universe.
 
  • #5
Hope this analogy will help you understand science better.

A group of crime scene investigators arrive at hotel. In front of the hotel lies a man in a pool of blood. Most bones in his body is crushed, which is a result of a high velocity impact. Shreds of glass is found in his clothing and he is missing his coat. The CSI team look up, finding a large, broken window on the 20th floor. The go up and inside the room, they see a coat hanging with a name tag on it which is the same as the name tag on the wallet found in the deceased pants. The team can also successfully calculate the trajectory for something that has moved out of the window and the landing is within the uncertainness of the measurements of the position where the deceased could be found.

Without having seen the actual jump, they can say with a high degree of certainty that the man was in that room, moved through the window and then affected by gravity, putting him on the ground with a lot of bones crushed. And all this without actually having seen the process with their own eyes...

Compare this with someone who says that he has faith that the person fell or claimed that it had been privately revealed to him that the person fell without performing any investigation and without hearing or seeing anything of the hotel of scene.

The actual phenomena does not need to be repeated, just the investigation of it. Science is not religion.
 
  • #6
Good answer, Moridin.
 

1. What is "Uncovering the Truth" and why was it created?

"Uncovering the Truth" is a physics website dedicated to evidence-based discussions. It was created to provide a platform for scientists and researchers to engage in discussions and share their findings and evidence on various topics related to physics.

2. Who can participate in discussions on "Uncovering the Truth"?

Anyone who is interested in evidence-based discussions on physics can participate on our website. This includes scientists, researchers, students, and anyone who is curious about the latest discoveries and evidence in the field of physics.

3. Are all discussions on "Uncovering the Truth" based on scientific evidence?

Yes, our website is dedicated to evidence-based discussions, which means that all discussions are centered around scientific evidence and research. We encourage our members to provide credible sources and evidence to support their arguments and engage in respectful and constructive discussions.

4. Can I submit my own evidence or research for discussion on "Uncovering the Truth"?

Absolutely! We welcome submissions from our members and encourage them to share their own evidence and research on topics related to physics. However, we do ask that all submissions are based on credible and peer-reviewed sources.

5. How can I stay updated on the discussions and new evidence on "Uncovering the Truth"?

You can stay updated by becoming a member of our website and subscribing to our newsletter. We also regularly post updates and new discussions on our social media pages, so be sure to follow us there as well.

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
690
Replies
14
Views
898
Replies
2
Views
428
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
806
  • Feedback and Announcements
Replies
1
Views
386
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
17
Views
2K
Back
Top