Is this stream of consciousness insanity or some other form of mystical enlightenment?

Terra incognita, Sacred ground, Mysterious territory. ( 2)
# Of course it is correct: the map is not territory.
But Napoleon was Napoleon because he knew
how to use the maps.
# Magellan was sure, as the south of Africa ended with the
Cape of Good Hope, so the south of America also had to
end on some cape and sailing around it he would come
to another sea, to another countries.
So, having one part of the map ( half of it ) and imaging
the other half of it, Magellan made a trip around the
world and described the map of the Earth as a whole.
Later the other researchers precised the details.
# On my opinion the Magellan’s situation we have now
in the quantum physics. . We have a map: one part
of it is material world , other part of it is vacuum.
And we know very much about electron.
For example, we know how electron works in the atom,
in our material world. But when electron sails into Vacuum –
it disappears there. How can electron come back from there?
How will the electron regenerate from the vacuum?
Nobody knows.
Isn’t clear that at first we must understand the Vacuum
(the another part of the map) and the electron in order
to describe the map of the Universe as a whole?
And later the other researchers will precise the details.
=====================.
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus
==================.

Cause & Effect:  Determinism & Probability.
1.
Classical physics.
Between cause & effect the determining principle acts.
Is this principle correct?
The classical experiments say: it is correct.
2.
Quantum physics.
Between cause & effect only probabilistic or
statistical principle acts.
Is this principle correct?
The quantum experiments say: it is correct.
3.
Why are they, both, correct?
Where is their unity?
  ===========.
Socratus.

tensordyne - 12 May 2010 04:20 PM

Is this stream of consciousness insanity or some other form of mystical enlightenment?

oh, and i thought it was just me, having trouble following.
i’m not sure it’s the right forum, but at least it’s properly categorized.

Aeronaut - 25 January 2010 02:35 PM

Henning - 25 January 2010 09:02 AM

Please move topic to trash folder.

I don’t know what’s written above, I’ve blocked that user.

Seconded.

Thirded. ‘Socratus’ is a well-known loon-troll who hawks his mathematically mystic misconceptions wherever he can. The quality of his thought is perhaps suggested by his transposition of the name Socrates from Greek into pseudo-Latin, as though that made it more impressive. I suspect bipolar mania.

I’ve got a little list, ...

Why we don’t have Philosophy of Physics ?
==========.
There is Classic Mechanic and Quantum Mechanic,
but there isn’t Philosophy of Physics. Why ? 
=======.
1.
In thermodynamics particles are “mathematical points”,
2.
In QT particles are “mathematical points”,
3.
In SRT particles are points.
4.
In QED particles are points.
5.
The energy, impulse, linear and angular momentum in physics
is also a ” mathematical point”.
6.
Then one “mathematical point” ( particle) interacts with another
“mathematical point” (energy, impulse . .etc ) the physicists say:
” The Quantum theory and micro-world are paradoxical.”
===============================.
Physics: Particle and its shadow Math Point.
Our Earth moves straight and rotates around itself.
Let us take an infinite small point and suggested
it also has these two kinds of movement.
What will be happen ? 
1 An infinite small point moves straight and its trajectory
shows us a straight line ( SRT)
2 An infinite small point changes its straight direction
( for example near Sun) and its trajectory curves ( GRT)
3 An infinite small point can rotate around itself. (?!)
Here is hidden a puzzle. (!)
Stupid question:
Does anybody ever draw point in his life?
!!!
Take pen and make point.
What do you see ?
Point, - you say.
And I see point, which has geometrical form of circle ( c/d=pi=3,14).
And even the smallest point will have geometrical form of circle
And even an Infinite Smallest Point will have geometrical form of circle
4 The SRT talks about an infinite small point which moves
in the Emptiness. (!) Which geometrical form can have this point ?
The Third law of Thermodynamics says in the Emptiness (!)
( in the Cold Emptiness ) an infinite small point cannot have volume.
It means an infinite small point must have geometrical form of circle
5 According to SRT this circle – particle cannot be firm,
it must be elastic. (!)
6.
In 1915 Einstein connected Mass with Geometry.
Maybe now, in 2010, somebody will try to understand the interaction
between an Infinite Small Particle and Geometry.
============================.
P.S.
In an Italian railway station.
It was more then two hours ‘till the departure of the train.
I went to the café and ordered a cup of coffee. Soon two men
and a very beautiful, slim woman took a place opposite me.
They ordered something to drink and one of the man opened
a case of violin and took out a bow. He began to explain
something about the bow, carefully and gently touching it.
Then another man took this bow and also enthusiastically
continued this conversation. For half an hour the bow was passed
from one hands to another followed with enthusiastic discussion.
And the beautiful woman looked at bow, at both these men without
saying a word. For half an hour I watched this group with admiration
and   excitement.  What a class!    What a cultural level!
What a beauty!
And now let’s imagine the bow pressed into a “mathematical point”
and the musicians speak seriously about a “mathematical point”
which must produce a sound from a violin.
Everybody will say I describe an idiotic situation.
Well, I agree.
But why doesn’t anybody say it to physicists when they observe
an elementary particle as a “mathematical point” , without paying
attention to its geometrical form.
# If physicists think about a particle as a ” mathematical point”
the result can be only paradoxical. And I am sure if somebody
takes into consideration the geometrical form of particle the
paradoxes in Physics will disappear.
We will have Philosophy of Physics.
# When Feynman said “I think I can safely say that nobody
understands quantum mechanics.” it was only because nobody took
into consideration the geometrical form of a particle.
==========.
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus
===============.