God is Electricity (?)

[PRR]

"Is it not said, In the beginning was the Word and the Word was God? Did not all being begin with a bolt of lightning? It struck the sea and the sea conceived. All is charged. The words that tell of charge are themselves charged. The ampere is produced by one watt acting through one ohm and it is equal to one coulomb per second and its sign is I. And I-ampere is by interpretation God the Father, and watt is What the Ineffable, and coulomb is by interpretation Dove, which is to say the Holy Ghost, and ohm has the sound of homme, which is Man. In short, I saw that God is Electricity. And I said weeping, 'Why me, O Lord, why me?' But His will I will not resist."

Seven Day's Wonder, by Edward Wellen
The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, March 1963

[jjasilli]

 

[Ritchie200]

Yup.

"In summary, it is proposed that the image was formed by an extremely rapid powerful burst of charged particle radiation from the body that caused a static discharge from the top fibers on the cloth facing the body. The resulting extremely high electron flow could have discolored the fibers by heating. Due to electromagnetic effects, an extremely high electrical current in a conductor will flow primarily in the outer perimeter of the conductor, so that heat from the electron flow would be deposited primarily in the outer perimeter of the conductor. Similarly, an extremely high electron flow in the fibers would deposit the resulting heat primarily in the outer perimeter of the fiber, just where the fibers are discolored in the image. If ozone were also produced in the air by the static discharge, it could also chemically attack the outer perimeter of the fibers. Both effects could explain the microscopic characteristics of the image: 1) only the top one or two layers of fibers discolored in a thread, 2) a discoloration thickness on the fibers of only about 0.2 microns out of the 10 to 20 micron thickness of the fibers, and 3) discoloration of the fibers caused by single electron bonds being changed to double electron bonds on the carbon atoms that were already in the cellulose molecules in the fibers that make the image"

Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin
by Robert A. Rucker, MS (nuclear)
Rev. 1, July 14, 2019
Reviewed by Arthur Lind, PhD (physics)
Kevin Schwinkendorf, PhD (nuclear)

http://www.shroudresearch.net/hproxy.php/Image-Formation-on-the-Shroud-of-Turin.pdf?lbisphpreq=1

[vampwizzard]

[silverfox]

"Is it not said, In the beginning was the Word and the Word was God? . . . . And I said weeping, 'Why me, O Lord, why me?' But His will I will not resist."

Seven Day's Wonder, by Edward Wellen
The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, March 1963

Seriously? We both know the scope of what you began.


For starters:


Binding EnergyNuclear binding energy is the energy required to split a nucleus of an atom into its component parts: protons and neutrons, or, collectively, the nucleons. The binding energy of nuclei is always a positive number, since all nuclei require net energy to separate them into individual protons and neutrons.Dude, are you up to this? ?.Fox.

[shooter]

I being God has me thinking His Inner Sanctum  should be super conductivity,
Arguing once Niobium (Israel’s lost tribe) reaches 4K (the 4 Korners of Gods inner sanctum); R(man) is no longer relevant, which lets V be free to wander Leaving I (God)
+ or – 2
 
 

[Ritchie200]

YOU cant have a -2!!!!!!  It is just 8ft above the bottom of a 10 foot deep pool.....

Jim

[jjasilli]

 

[silverfox]

"Seriously? We both know the scope of what you began."


Well, I thought I did.


Turns out this cigarette tossed out a car window Topic is shaping up to be more of an . . . Inkblot Test. And furthermore, I've sometime ago abandoned the presumption there is a difference between religion and politics. There is not. Politics is the outward manifestation and construct of ones internal belief system.

The responses thus far are proving fertile ground for quark analysis. Are you up, down, or funny.

silverfox.

[shooter]

There is not.

thinking "I" might disagree  but then I'm just an R, kinda clueless to what I & V do

[silverfox]

Down the worm hole-
“But I don’t want to go among mad people,”“Oh, you can’t help that,” said the Cat: “we’re all mad here. I’m mad. You’re mad.”“How do you know I’m mad?”“You must be,” said the Cat, “or you wouldn’t have come here.”

Fox.

[murrayatuptown]

I had to write a paper in a religion class in the 70's, and I used the 'you can't see it, buy if you touch it, you KNOW it's there's concept about electricity. I don't anything else I wrote about in that paper. Just the important part. Keeping one hand behind your back.

[shooter]

Got bored so I started here,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_value

4hrs of linked-up rabbit holes lead me to this;

The problem of induction[edit]
Joel Feinberg and Russ Shafer-Landau note that "using the scientific method to judge the scientific method is circular reasoning". Scientists attempt to discover the laws of nature and to predict what will happen in the future, based on those laws. However, per David Hume's problem of induction, science cannot be proven inductively by empirical evidence, and thus science cannot be proven scientifically. An appeal to a principle of the uniformity of nature would be required to deductively necessitate the continued accuracy of predictions based on laws that have only succeeded in generalizing past observations. But as Bertrand Russell observed, "The method of 'postulating' what we want has many advantages; they are the same as the advantages of theft over honest toil".[7]



can't figure out how I missed this growing up 

[sluckey]

Sometimes you just gotta hang a sign on the door... OUT TO LUNCH.

[Ritchie200]

You are no fun and GET OFF MY LAWN!

Jim

[Tony Bones]

There's a joke about two philosophers sitting on a park bench. The first one says "dogs can hear ultrasonic frequencies." The second one replies, "not being a dog, you can't possibly know that." So the first one comes back with, "not being me, you can't possibly know what I know."

Meanwhile a beautiful woman walks by but neither one notices.

[Ritchie200]

"Philosophy: A route of many roads leading from nowhere to nothing." -Ambrose Bierce

A woman hears from her doctor that she has only six months to live. The doctor advises her to marry a philosopher and to live in South Dakota. The woman asks: "Will this cure my illness?" The doctor: "No, but the half year will seem like forever."

Jim

[silverfox]

Got bored so I started here,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_value

4hrs of linked-up rabbit holes lead me to this;

The problem of induction[edit]
Joel Feinberg and Russ Shafer-Landau note that "using the scientific method to judge the scientific method is circular reasoning". Scientists attempt to discover the laws of nature and to predict what will happen in the future, based on those laws. However, per David Hume's problem of induction, science cannot be proven inductively by empirical evidence, and thus science cannot be proven scientifically. An appeal to a principle of the uniformity of nature would be required to deductively necessitate the continued accuracy of predictions based on laws that have only succeeded in generalizing past observations. But as Bertrand Russell observed, "The method of 'postulating' what we want has many advantages; they are the same as the advantages of theft over honest toil".[7]



can't figure out how I missed this growing up 

You just described the Stock Market.


silverfox.

[shooter]

GET OFF MY LAWN!

There were a few homes left in Norfolk that had "Sailors n dogs stay OFF the lawn"
Me and Banjo just pissed on their signs 

[shooter]

You just described the Stock Market.
AI has replaced the emotional guys in cow suits, the interesting thing, AI seems to be even more emotional 

The Turing machine I where I started my rabbit-hole off the rails, bookmarked this for future boredom 
 
http://www.turingfinance.com/dissecting-algorithmic-trading/

[jjasilli]

There's a joke about two philosophers sitting on a park bench. The first one says "dogs can hear ultrasonic frequencies." The second one replies, "not being a dog, you can't possibly know that." So the first one comes back with, "not being me, you can't possibly know what I know."  Meanwhile a beautiful woman walks by but neither one notices.

I love that reasoning.  I believe its origin is in ancient Taoism, as recounted (sans beautiful woman) in Wikipedia:  "The story of "The Debate on the Joy of Fish" is a well-known anecdote that has been compared to the Socratic dialogue tradition of ancient Greece."

     莊子與惠子遊於濠梁之上。莊子曰：儵魚出遊從容，是魚樂也。
     Zhuangzi and Huizi were enjoying themselves on the bridge over the Hao River. Zhuangzi said, "The minnows are darting about free and easy! This is how fish are happy."

     惠子曰：子非魚，安知魚之樂。莊子曰：子非我，安知我不知魚之樂。
     Huizi replied, "You are not a fish. How do you know that the fish are happy?" Zhuangzi said, "You are not I. How do you know that I do not know that the fish are happy?"

     惠子曰：我非子，固不知子矣；子固非魚也，子之不知魚之樂全矣。
     Huizi said, "I am not you, to be sure, so of course I don't know about you. But you obviously are not a fish; so the case is complete that you do not know that the fish are happy."

     莊子曰：請循其本。子曰汝安知魚樂云者，既已知吾知之而問我，我知之濠上也。
     Zhuangzi said, "Let's go back to the beginning of this. You said, How do you know that the fish are happy; but in asking me this, you already knew that I know it. I know it right here above the Hao."
— Zhuangzi, chapter 17 (Watson translation)

****
I agree that science is at least somewhat circular: first positing an objective reality; then using the scientific method to "prove" its attributes.  And Hume's problem of induction, along with Bacon's problem of induction by mere enumeration, seem to be inescapable. 

[sluckey]

Smoke 'em if you got 'em.   

[Tony Bones]

The philosophy is sound, yet science just keeps on rolling along. 

[jjasilli]

"Seriously? We both know the scope of what you began."


Well, I thought I did.


Turns out this cigarette tossed out a car window Topic is shaping up to be more of an . . . Inkblot Test. And furthermore, I've sometime ago abandoned the presumption there is a difference between religion and politics. There is not. Politics is the outward manifestation and construct of ones internal belief system.

The responses thus far are proving fertile ground for quark analysis. Are you up, down, or funny.

silverfox.

Yes.  According to Mercia Eliade, former Chair of Comparative Religious Studies @ Chicago University, man is inherently a religious creature. And William James in "The Varieties of Religious Experience", that any strongly held belief is tantamount to a religious belief. 

[shooter]

before I light one 

any strongly held belief is tantamount to a religious belief. 

in the modern world I'd replace religious with ideological but I'm NOT gonna drink the cool-aid 

[jjasilli]

I see your point, but William James was specifically writing about and analyzing religion.

[shooter]

Don't want to take anything away from the author.

I'm just an observer in a small sample set 
my observation, Ideology has co-opted, watered down....  "religion" in an other than scholarly sense
but back to math,
Can an equation validate it's way out of the circular science loop I posted 

[rafe]

ah knowed dat.

[jjasilli]

Can an equation validate it's way out of the circular science loop I posted 

With specific regard to equations per se, they are subject by definition to mathematical proof.  Thus they cannot be subject to "reasonable" doubt.  Yet Descartes, the father of modern scientific method, in his work "Meditations", worried that a demon might be tricking him into believing that his proofs were good, even though they were false.  He bootstrapped this into his proof for the existence of God, to get out of this quagmire, declaring that "God is not a deceiver".  Shocking, considering that God turns out to be Electricity.   


Anyway, when we get to scientific Propositions, they are subject to the problems of induction mentioned above.  There is no way out -- No Exit (Sartre).  And it gets worse. 


Building on the work of Godel, in the 1940's (I believe) Church, Gooding & Turing conclusively established that for any robust System (of science, thought or mathematics) it will eventually be found that within the System there is at least one proposition P, and its opposite -P, and which one is true cannot be established within the System.  It may be possible to conceive of a more comprehensive System which resolves that issue; but the new System will have its own P vs -P issues.  This discovery brought an end to the project of the Enlightenment (which began in the 1500's or 1600's) which assumed that mankind's knowledge could increase incrementally over time, guided by the scientific method.  Unfortunately facts (knowledge) are meaningful only within the context of a System; but all Systems are imperfect, being plagued by the problems mentioned. 


The collapse of the Enlightenment, the crown jewel of the Modern Period of history, gave full rise to post-Modernism which had been lurking in the Arts, since Cubism circa 1907.

[shooter]

Nice, you are 2 steps ahead and better phased than I 

Church, Gooding & Turing

yep read them, got mighty confused, started clearing up, only to get confused, so it's off to some abstract Art 

aside (if there is a thing:)
The ship I was on had 4 identical Radar systems.  We would validate an unknown reading/measurement against the other 3's average for the same measurement/reading.  30yrs later I still used that same logic for trouble-shooting 

[jjasilli]

Yes, measure thrice, cut once!  I didn't even recognize the painting connection.  Pretty cool!

[silverfox]

For your consideration, my accumulated response to date.


Fox

[shooter]

symmetry, always a good thing geometry 

 

[jjasilli]

Two 1930's dandies playing patti-cake near a butterfly.

[shooter]

 
that WAS my 1st thought!  Can-Can era, I went more for  burlesque dancers, but I tried to keep it logic/math/philosophy.
I did spend brain time pondering if philosophy is the impetus of Math;
I think/thought, therefore I have to prove it 

[jjasilli]