Originally posted by PITT_HAPPENSI suppose we can make estimations. Some things appear very, very, very, likely.
I wouldn't say "know" but more of an idea. There is plenty that we don't know about a lot of thing especially space and until we really get out there is is only speculation at this point.
Originally posted by NewjakWe can given the right set of criteria such as if you drop a ball you know that it fall at a certain rate if you are on Earth. What would happen on Saturn we can guess, theories but until we can duplicate and account for every last possible detail we don’t know for sure.
Is that enough to say we are sure of them?
Originally posted by ShakyamunisonYou're being typically charitable. 😛
All of what we know is less then ~1% of the true nature of reality.
Originally posted by Newjak
We as a race, the race of Humanity, claim that we can proclaim a lot of stuff.Just to name a few of things humanity claims we can do:
-We can tell how old the Earth is
-We can tell how Life was started
-We can tell how our Universe works
-We can tell how old the universeSo given what we claim to know and some of the stuff humanity has claimed in the past just how much doyou think we as a race really know about what is going on around us?
Originally posted by MindshipSo what you are saying is we do not know that much until we completely learn about ourselves
You're being typically charitable. 😛It's interesting that all the things you listed deal with empirical science. Since I tend to assume there's a more fundamental, transcendent reality giving rise to the phenomenal universe, I think the Shak's figure is reasonable. Personally, until we start some serious study of Consciousness (and Not necessarily try to reduce it to neurochemical, epiphenomenal impulses), I think we're never going to get a real handle on the Big Picture.
Originally posted by Newjak
So what you are saying is we do not know that much until we completely learn about ourselves
That's what neurologists/psychologists/student of the human mind would like to think.
In each specific field of science, a lot of scientists think their field of study is the most important and fundemental.
Re: What do we know
Originally posted by Newjak
Mostly because I'm bored and I think too much when I'm bored I have a question.We as a race, the race of Humanity, claim that we can proclaim a lot of stuff.
Just to name a few of things humanity claims we can do:
-We can tell how old the Earth is
-We can tell how Life was started
-We can tell how our Universe works
-We can tell how old the universe
well actually, none of those facts are certain. The only one that may be a fairly cemented estimation would be the age of our planet
Re: Re: What do we know
Originally posted by ragesRemorseWell its not just about those. Were do you think we get to before we can no longer be certain about what we as a race know.
well actually, none of those facts are certain. The only one that may be a fairly cemented estimation would be the age of our planet
Originally posted by dadudemonThis is more from the mystic/meditative POV.
That's what neurologists/psychologists/student of the human mind would like to think.
Originally posted by NewjakThat's another way to put it, yes.
So what you are saying is we do not know that much until we completely learn about ourselves
Re: What do we know
Originally posted by NewjakProbably a drop in the ocean.
Mostly because I'm bored and I think too much when I'm bored I have a question.We as a race, the race of Humanity, claim that we can proclaim a lot of stuff.
Just to name a few of things humanity claims we can do:
-We can tell how old the Earth is
-We can tell how Life was started
-We can tell how our Universe works
-We can tell how old the universeSo given what we claim to know and some of the stuff humanity has claimed in the past just how much doyou think we as a race really know about what is going on around us?
Discuss
Originally posted by Bardock42
I am no physicist (being better than them), but I believe the cosmic microwave background radiation is a relatively certain evidence of the age of the universe
The background microwave radiation associated with the big bang is misleading. It is not the birth of the universe that caused this...it was actually the birth of atoms that created this radiation. It was the moment the universe cooled off enough to allow electrons to form atoms with the existing atomic nuclei to form hydrogen and helium. The entire universe came to life in an instant of brilliant light. (it was like a hundred thousands years after the birth of the universe or something like that…I can’t remember.) Before then...then universe was just a hot-opaque cloud of sub-atomic particles. Imagine the brilliance of such a moment to witness the birth of complete matter...instantly going from utter darkness to brilliance in an instant...amazing to even ponder such a thing.
But anyway...that is what the radiation is from.
Originally posted by dadudemon
That's what neurologists/psychologists/student of the human mind would like to think.In each specific field of science, a lot of scientists think their field of study is the most important and fundemental.
my experience is that most neurology students or bio/cognitive psyche students are reductionist and do not look at consciousness as one of the most fundamental aspects of science, if even human behaviour. (quantum physicists 🙄 )
My experience is more with students who get into research rather than those who do not, so that could really slant my exposure. Consciousness is more a term associated with new age, not science.
I heard somewhere that we only know the (I'm gonna say something stupid now) let's say, 65% of the sea-world. And that got me thinking, how do we know that what we don't know is the 35% of the all, when we don't even know how much is the all?
Maybe there's some logic answer and only I can't figure it out. 🙄