Time and information of Guillemenant

General scientific debates. Presentations of new technologies (not directly related to renewable energies or biofuels or other themes developed in other sub-sectors) forums).
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: Guillemenant's time and information




by Janic » 08/02/18, 14:07

janic wrote: Everything is just belief! [*] You believe in a certain form of materialist science, which sees in matter its reason for being matter and it is an option which is well worth another, but thus confusing cause and effect.
An external intervention separates the two, it's just another option, another belief then which is well worth the first!

It is an inference on your part, matter does not exist in absolute terms, it is simply the term that we use to designate interactions on our scale, materialism is a thought inherited from the 19th century and which now have a lot of lead in the wing ...
Already seen ! This notion of matter, even outdated, remains a concrete reality. A hammer blow on the finger (Ouch!) Remains painful despite the fact that the enormous space existing between each atom of a molecule makes it likely (even with the Higgs boson!) To collide!
Regarding beliefs:
We generally designate by belief the act of considering something to be true.
From this we can determine two types of beliefs: rational beliefs, verified as for example heliocentrism and non-refutable, unrecognized beliefs, such as that of god, fairies etc ...
There is a third which is to believe that supposedly rational approaches, but unverifiable by lack of adequate means are therefore not observed as for the living and therefore the self-organization of this one
Putting both types of approach on an equal footing is a manifest error, not to say a desire to deceive (?).
Who would then seek to deceive the other (?)
This is what I reproach you for, you confuse dogma and science considering the self-organization of the living as a fact whereas it is only supposition, which some researchers try to demonstrate, but without convincing result.
But the self-organization of the living is a fact my dear friend, this is also more a fact than the roundness of the earth, because everyone can see it with their own eyes! When you hurt yourself your skin heals on its own, it is not an obscure god who launches its "after sales service" to start repairs!
Re-re-repeat. Scarring is a phenomenon of which we only know His look of self-organization of the fact that the appearance of this one (the cicatrization) is not accessible to us being its distant origin, we do nothing but note its existence, its outstanding not its origin.
To see it with his eyes! This is the main argument of the creation hypothesis and therefore of an ability to produce complex mechanisms, visible in their achievements, allowing living things to stay alive. Nothing to do with self-organization because the complexity, which the sciences in biology describe more and more precisely ... can not owe anything to chance.
What has not yet been 100% demonstrated is the self-organization of non-living structures into living structures, nuance!
Major nuance!
But not 100%, but 0%. In this area, there are no missing intermediate links. We are alive or we are not!
Let the time for scientific research to show us all this, however in terms theoretical this concept has long been acquired.
your two references are not evidence but just theories applicable to materials physics and chemistry, not alive itself!
Either you ask for proofs, and you have to do the same for your assertions, or else we stick to hypotheses, theories and other beliefs and everything is fine like that!
Lots of theories, which have been confronted with the reality that a hyper complex world, have broken their faces miserably.
The idea that is beginning to develop is that of quantum biology, which moves away from the strictly mechanistic vision that we still find in Darwinism.

[*] On this subject, from the quantum world, this video of Aurelien Barrau among others by the same author (who says: I believe that… Him too!) While affirming his ignorance, which does not prevent it from being particularly interesting:
already mentioned.
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749

Re: Guillemenant's time and information




by sen-no-sen » 08/02/18, 15:47

Janic wrote:Scarring is a phenomenon of which we only know its appearance of self-organization because the appearance of it (scarring) is not accessible to us being its distant origin, we only note its existence, its not its origin.


This remark typically summarizes your point of view: the self-organization of living things being a fact that can be observed by all, you are forced to resort to conceptual artifices such as the very hazy "distant origin" to keep your belief afloat. . without obviously having the courage to say that this "origin" would be based on a late interpretation of a monotheistic cult sauce young earth creationism...

In short, if a volcano spits lava, rather than considering the reality of the phenomenon, you preferred to invent the idea of ​​a demiurge living in the bowels of the earth. : roll: Fiction comes before reality!
Overall, all of your reasoning is based on an inversion of the facts: you consider human work as anterior to the natural process and more serious still, you infer ideas according to speculation rather than referring to concrete realities.
It's dénisme and dénisme severe.
But you are not alone in this situation, there are also even more serious cases like platists(defenders of the idea that the earth is flat), recentists(who imagine that the middle ages did not take place), the complotisme inspired Illuminati etc ...

Lots of theories, which have been confronted with the reality that a hyper complex world, have broken their faces miserably.


And others predicted phenomena 70 years ahead ... due to the lack of technical resources at the time.
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: Guillemenant's time and information




by Janic » 08/02/18, 17:22

janic wrote: Scarring is a phenomenon of which we only know its appearance of self-organization because the appearance of it (scarring) is not accessible to us being its distant origin, we are only seeing its existence, its stock not its origin.
This remark typically summarizes your point of view: the self-organization of living things being a fact that everyone can see, you have to resort to conceptual artifices like the very hazy "distant origin" to keep your belief afloat. .without of course having the courage to say that this "origin" would be based on a late interpretation of a monotheistic cult sauce creationism young earth ...
It looks like a TJ who for lack of argument resumes his speech at square one. A beginning has nothing to do with I do not know what young earth creationism that I do not even know, I have already said, apply it to any beginning, even evolutionary, it does not change the fact that we let's ignore everything.
In short, if a volcano spits lava, rather than considering the reality of the phenomenon, you preferred to invent the idea of ​​a demiurge living in the bowels of the earth.
Any nonsense rather than seeing reality in the face! Where did you go to get that: in your cathechism? Sorry, I never did!
Fiction comes before reality!
Overall, all of your reasoning is based on an inversion of the facts: you consider human work as anterior to the natural process and more serious still, you infer ideas according to speculation rather than referring to concrete realities.
You take your imaginative fantasies to attribute them to others. Reread all my prose and find some passage where I would have made such a statement!
It is denism and severe denism.
Don't project yourself on others! You spend your time denying and denying the fact that the self-organization of the living is only a simple unverified hypothesis. But you are not alone in this situation, there are even more serious cases like the platists (defenders of the idea that the earth is flat), the recentists (who imagine that the middle ages did not occurred), the trendy Illuminati conspiracy etc ... and therefore the evolutionists who do not go wrong in this rotten pot!
If you revel in this kind of literature, this is not my cup of tea.
Lots of theories, which have been confronted with the reality that a hyper complex world, have broken their faces miserably.
And others predicted phenomena 70 years ahead ... due to the lack of technical resources at the time.
my formulation followed this as being the consequence:
your two references are not proof but just theories applicable to the physics of materials and chemistry, not living itself!
Either you ask for proofs, and you have to do the same for your assertions, or else we stick to hypotheses, theories and other beliefs and everything is fine like that!


And since you are predicting it years in advance and to satisfy your ego: biblical prophetism of which the father of modern science was a big fan, announced in advance for tens of centuries, without technical means, this that our era lives on. Einstein mathematically layers the relativity which has been inscribed there for centuries as well and from which he was able to draw inspiration from his Jewish culture. So what !
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963

Re: Guillemenant's time and information




by Ahmed » 08/02/18, 18:21

Janic, you write:
(it is your specialty that the economy and its deviances)

This is a shortcut that I must reject: this is the opinion of Christophe and "aghast economists" and many others, my position is that the economy operates strictly according to its original principles and therefore that its so-called "deviations" are the result of poor analysis.
Delenda economy, if you do not mind! : Lol:

For the rest, even if your favorite example remains valid, reducing any opinion to a simple equivalent opinion, because of the same weight as any other, eliminates the very idea of ​​truth: the "to each his own truth" makes this null and void. concept.
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: Guillemenant's time and information




by Janic » 08/02/18, 19:55

Janic, you write:
(it is your specialty that the economy and its deviances)
It is a shortcut that I am obliged to reject: that is the opinion of Christophe and of the "appalled economists" and of many others, my position is that the economy operates strictly in accordance with its initial principles and therefore that its alleged "deviations" are the result of poor analysis.
A thousand and one excuses then, I am hardly the subject, on which I have done little or no intervention, it is just the impression that I felt about it.
For the rest, even if your favorite example remains valid, reducing any opinion to a simple equivalent opinion, because of the same weight as any other, eliminates the very idea of ​​truth: the "to each his own truth" makes this null and void. concept.
Totally agree in principle! It remains to check it case by case! However it does not seem to me to have evoked or to have recommended me of any truth more true than another. I find, on the contrary, that opinions, opinions, contradictory are needed to compare them, but it is rare that this changes well anchored opinions and the goal is not there.

I simply "criticize" a speech single dominant, (not only in the area mentioned here, but in general.) even if he could be right (which is far from being the case!) and in this case it is inappropriate to condemn other unique discourses which preceded our present times.
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
User avatar
GuyGadebois
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6532
Registration: 24/07/19, 17:58
Location: 04
x 982

Re:




by GuyGadebois » 27/07/19, 19:39

sen-no-sen wrote:To further simplify, there is according to the work from quantum physics a Potential universe and a Universe in acts, that is to say a sum of potential possibilities (unimaginable!), and A realizable reality.
Our "reality" would therefore be an updating of the quantum potential, this is what we call in a laboratory experiment the wave function reduction.

So we should not seek a dualism between determinism and indeterminism, since the two processes are at work in our Universe.
For example: if I am a human being (biological determinism), the trajectories that I can operate in space time are in turn indeterministic ...


Guillemant's theory tends to go beyond the concept of dynamic time space, since it considers that the future (s) already exist (s) and that it (s) influence (s) on our present ... This idea is far from being eccentric because it sticks very well to the experiments (see the experiments of non locality and quantum gum with delayed choices).

Richard Phillips Feynman
"If you think you understand quantum mechanics, then you don't understand it."

A little modesty in the face of unimaginable, inexplicable and unexplained phenomena would be in order.

A final one, by the same author:
Light and material by Richard Phillips Feynman:
"What I am going to tell you is none other than what we are teaching students who are doing a thesis in physics. Do you really think I can explain all of this to you in a way that you understand? is not serious: you will certainly not understand. But then, you will say, why do you go to so much trouble? Why spend so much time in front of us, if it is so that we do not understand anything about it. what are you going to say?
Precisely, I made it my goal that you stay here and listen to me. Because to be honest, the students don't understand anything either. Why ? Quite simply because I do not understand it myself. No one else understands it. "
0 x
“It is better to mobilize your intelligence on bullshit than to mobilize your bullshit on intelligent things. (J.Rouxel)
"By definition the cause is the product of the effect". (Tryphion)
"360 / 000 / 0,5 is 100 million and not 72 million" (AVC)
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749

Re: Guillemenant's time and information




by sen-no-sen » 27/07/19, 20:36

Quantum physics nobody understands anything but it is 10% of the GDP of the industrial nations and it is one of the sections of the most solid scientific study.
Which even makes certain physicists say that general relativity would only be an approximation with regard to QM.
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
User avatar
GuyGadebois
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6532
Registration: 24/07/19, 17:58
Location: 04
x 982

Re: Guillemenant's time and information




by GuyGadebois » 27/07/19, 20:38

sen-no-sen wrote:Quantum physics nobody understand anything but it's 10% of the GDP of industrial nations and it’s one of the most solid parts of scientific study.
Which even makes certain physicists say that general relativity would only be an approximation with regard to QM.

As Chirac said "it touches me one without moving the other".
0 x
“It is better to mobilize your intelligence on bullshit than to mobilize your bullshit on intelligent things. (J.Rouxel)
"By definition the cause is the product of the effect". (Tryphion)
"360 / 000 / 0,5 is 100 million and not 72 million" (AVC)
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79126
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10974

Re: Guillemenant's time and information




by Christophe » 28/07/19, 01:15

10% ??? really ???

So 25 billion per year in the PQ in France alone ??

Source?

The total budget of cnrs is 2.6 billion ...

http://www.cnrs.fr/fr/cnrsinfo/budget-i ... ente-au-ca
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: Guillemenant's time and information




by Janic » 28/07/19, 08:37

Quantum physics nobody understand anything
It's reassuring! But if it works it doesn't matter; whatever all fans of scientifically proven. : Cheesy:
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Science and Technology"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : A.D. 44, Remundo and 208 guests