Would you be tell me then why the concept of geocentricism was put aside? What did exactly happen to those old world concepts?
-
-
Replying to @NegarestaniReza @higherOrderNet and
This overextension of Darwinism is the actual betrayal of Darwin. It has zero explanatory value. How can you describe or explain anything objectively if every concept is gauged by its spreading factor? Concepts are inferences, that's why some of them get repaired or replaced.
4 replies 1 retweet 32 likes -
Replying to @NegarestaniReza @higherOrderNet and
we're never going to agree.
4 replies 2 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @cyborg_nomade @NegarestaniReza and
Of course. Vulgar scientism isn't fit for the environment of intelligence.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @anti_minotaur @NegarestaniReza and
no, it just seems obvious to me that major changes in religious behaviour - and social institutions in general - have as underlying causes changes in population behaviour, driven by a new combination of environmental selective pressures and consequent adaptive mutations.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cyborg_nomade @anti_minotaur and
'It seems obvious to me ...'
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @NegarestaniReza @cyborg_nomade and
"but can u present a better theory than the standard (my) model?"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Junk_lzn @NegarestaniReza and
cosmic Darwinism is probably more something that no one believes, but universal expansion is as mainstream as it gets, if that's what's important for you.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cyborg_nomade @Junk_lzn and
Cosmic expansion is as mainstream as it comes yet there's a clear reason Land's article is published on Jacobite rather than Modern Physics or even, say, arXiv. It's gibberish from a physical perspective and if you want some real necrophysics you'll have to look elsewhere.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @anti_minotaur @cyborg_nomade and
Nick can't even differentiate between the isotropy of space and the isotropy of time which doesn't hold for the mechanical laws of physics. Thermodynamics tried to bridge the asymmetry of the former with the symmetry of the latter but it found itself in much deeper problems.
2 replies 0 retweets 8 likes
These pop acc. of entropy are suspicious. 2nd law is the combination of the 1st and its extension: energy can't be created ex nihilo hence the movement toward equilibrium based on the changes in the form of energy, and then decrease in the exploitability of that form of energy.
-
-
Replying to @NegarestaniReza @anti_minotaur and
I suspect the operative part here is 'form of' energy.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @maimunkaddah @anti_minotaur and
That's a very good question. Yes, essentially the movement from the first law to the second one is based on this innocent assumption that the quantity of energy is conserved but the change in the form of energy reduces its exploitability over time.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes - 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.