Where is the debunking forum

  • Thread starter rodsika
  • Start date
  • #1
274
2

Main Question or Discussion Point

Hi, why is the debunking forum gone? does it have to do with the fact that after the discovery of the Higgs. Science is complete and the universe is purely nuts and bolts and humans mere flesh and blood indistinguisable from animals and there is no mystery left in the world?
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
phinds
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
2019 Award
16,091
6,082
Debunking is merged w/ general discussion and there's a new forum "Science Fiction"
 
  • #4
lisab
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
1,887
616
Hi, why is the debunking forum gone? does it have to do with the fact that after the discovery of the Higgs. Science is complete and the universe is purely nuts and bolts and humans mere flesh and blood indistinguisable from animals and there is no mystery left in the world?
Yes, exactly.
 
  • #5
russ_watters
Mentor
19,574
5,853
I've figured all the rest of it out, but haven't had a chance to post it on my website yet. Football's started!
 
  • #6
Ryan_m_b
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
5,844
711
Hi, why is the debunking forum gone? does it have to do with the fact that after the discovery of the Higgs. Science is complete and the universe is purely nuts and bolts and humans mere flesh and blood indistinguisable from animals and there is no mystery left in the world?
It could be that it knew too much,
or that it was a threat to the Holy Dogma of Science with all its "questioning",
or that it was too much of an outlet for free speech,

or....because it was a crackpot magnet that added nothing positive to the site :smile:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=630244
 
Last edited:
  • #7
Pythagorean
Gold Member
4,191
255
The government and Bigfoot are working together to cover up traces of the debunking forum in what the Hollow Earth Society is now calling the grandest scandal since Galileo deceived the church. The Illuminati were not available for comment.
 
  • #8
274
2
Yes, exactly.
Not exactly. Let me explain very clearly.

Your arguments or the experts are usually that the arguments that the mind is a mystery, and the quantum is a mystery and merging them together is not a good idea. This is how the experts often view them. But think very carefully. What if there is a connection... a subtle one.

Let me explain briefly. Our quantum may just be tip of the iceberg. Remember with all the dozens of quantum interpretations, there is still no definite one. What if quantum is just a limiting case of a bigger theory that includes consciousness.. just like newtonian physics is just a limiting classical case of general and special relativity.

And it may not even be called "quantum"... I know "quantum" just refers to the schroedinger equations, but that's because you limit it that way.

Bottom line is. Many of you just want to be in the "Shut Up and Calculate" thing and done. But note one thing. "Shut Up and Calculate" can't produce qualia or mind. In a universe where "Shut Up and Calculate" rules. Only the Unconscious emerge. Meaning no qualia or self-awareness.

Beyond the quantum is related to the mind. How to understand the physics is the challenge.

Yes, this may be the only valid fringe thing to consider and something you can't refute or debunk.

Get it? Even without the above words, just simply listening to Bohm explaning the Implicate Order where the world is the Explicate Order and the Mind the Implicate Order
would be enough to say that we don't have a final word on the quantum and consciousness. Agree? If you don't agree and convinced the world is simply a machine. Then qualia or subjective experience or self-awareness shouldn't exist. Calculations no matter how complicated can only produce unconsciousness awareness, it can't produce subjective experience. Refute this. And if you can refute it. Then I agree there is no mystery left and the debunking thread or subject has to be annihilated forever.
 
  • #9
Ryan_m_b
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
5,844
711
Rodsika everyone is joshing with you, your proposal that science was finished was too hilarious not to make fun with. As for why S&D was closed please look at the links posted in Drakkith and my posts.

Also please note that we have no idea what an answer to the hard problem of consciousness would look like. Throwing in quantum physics and making bold claims that without quantum effects (beyond what is necessary for physics, chemistry etc) consciousness is not possible is an indefensible position.

On top of that the onus is not on others to refute your claim that conscious experience cannot arise without quantum effects (or some other esoteric undiscovered phenomenon), it is up to you to support it.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
274
2
Rodsika everyone is joshing with you, your proposal that science was finished was too hilarious not to make fun with. As for why S&D was closed please look at the links posted in Drakkith and my posts.

Also please note that we have no idea what an answer to the hard problem of consciousness would look like. Throwing in quantum physics and making bold claims that without quantum effects (beyond what is necessary for physics, chemistry etc) consciousness is not possible is an indefensible position.

On top of that the onus is not on others to refute your claim that conscious experience cannot arise without quantum effects (or some other esoteric undiscovered phenomenon), it is up to you to support it.
Maybe we must use more accurate terms.. like throwing away the often use "quantum". Maybe use "sub quantum" or "super quantum" or since these are not standard terms.. maybe let's coin a new term... hmm... what could it be... maybe.... "qualia grids" or "units of consciousness?" The public doesn't have a new word that is why they use the "quantum" to relate to the hard problem of consciousness and I think this is a category error.

About supporting it. Hmm... there is no words yet in physics to describe this future physics.. so how can one even begin to talk about it to scientific people? It's like a 15th century scientist trying to describe general relativity.

But for the sake of mankind. We must force this new physics upon us and invent new terms. Any good books or articles that discuss about this?

Maybe for now we can just use Bohm description of mind as the implicate order. Maybe it's the only thing that we can do for now. A century from now. We will know about it more. But then.. we are not around to witness this golden age. Unless we force the discovery now and here in this lifetime.
 
  • #11
Ryan_m_b
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
5,844
711
Maybe we must use more accurate terms.. like throwing away the often use "quantum". Maybe use "sub quantum" or "super quantum" or since these are not standard terms.. maybe let's coin a new term... hmm... what could it be... maybe.... "qualia grids" or "units of consciousness?" The public doesn't have a new word that is why they use the "quantum" to relate to the hard problem of consciousness and I think this is a category error.
We could make up new terms for things that we have no evidence for and attribute characteristics to them that are not indicted but that wouldn't be science, it would be stupidity.

Like I said, the S&D forum was a magnet for crackpots.
 
  • #12
Evo
Mentor
23,134
2,661
Rodsika, the topics you mention were not appropriate for the S&D forum, which is also one of the reasons it was closed. S&D was for the discussion of unexplained phenomena, like lights in the sky, moving rocks, thrumming sounds, apparitions, etc...
 

Related Threads on Where is the debunking forum

Replies
30
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
43
Views
10K
  • Last Post
Replies
16
Views
13K
Replies
348
Views
39K
Replies
45
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
22
Views
31K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
2K
Top