A brief intro to the current theory of (almost) everything – the Standard Model of particle physics. It’s like cake, only universal. minutephysics is now on Google+ – bit.ly And facebook – facebook.com And twitter – @minutephysics Minute Physics provides an energetic and entertaining view of old and new problems in physics — all in a minute! Music by Nathaniel Schroeder NEW ALBUM!! — juliansaporiti.bandcamp.com youtube: bit.ly Thanks to Nima Doroud and Alex Yale for contributions and to Perimeter Institute for support.
by TMAB2003
I think so, or Trolls ARE science?
Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy FTW!!!
I wonder how many markers he has? O.o
“Interdimensional Politics” lol I like that.
there is no why. get over it. Before responding to this comment: i made a video about there not being a why, you may want to comment on that video instead of here.
No. Religion is inter dimensional politics. Now go learn some Science that isn’t 15th century opinion.
Cognitive dissonance
I disagree. Science can explain how religion can explain why. The Minister at my church is a science teacher… and has a degree in science.
…and watch Internet Videos
Trolls like sciencey stuff?
Haha. 42
I love these videos but why so many trolls?
Fair enough, but it still doesn’t address the larger issue that the concept of a ” perfect circle” and therefore of an actual precise value for Pi is little more than metaphysical hokum itself.
You may need the concept of infinity to do math don’t need to believe that 0.999…=1 in any real sense, just like you don’t need to believe that the bread is ACTUALLY body to gain spiritually.
Mathematicians only cling to it because it lends a false sense of justification to their work.
Yeah, I don’t find metaphysics important, sorry.
Proton, elementary particle? More a subatomic particle.
I didn’t say that god is a useful axiom in empirical science. God is a useful axiom in metaphysics (is what I said), if you don’t think metaphysics is important, then god help you
Also, all the earlier problems apply to a circle also. There is no such thing as a perfect circle in reality or in your imagination even if you are strict with yourself. There are only successively more more accurate approximations to it.
Allowing infinity just opens the door to masking fuzzy inaccurate thinking.
A circle appears to be an infinite set of points, any other definition isn’t a circle.
If you can make accurate predictions about the world using the concept of a god then I would be forced to accept it to be logically consistent.
Lol, infinity can be a very expansive subject matter
But of course you COULD do math without infinity.
You would just need to drop quasi-mystical claims like 0.999…=1 and replace it with accuracy stipulations: 0.999 = 1 to a precision of 5 decimal places (or however you want to phrase that.
But that would mean losing the semi-religious notion of mathematical “accuracy”, which of course would be a tragedy. Plus it would make it far harder to lie with statistics, but that is another matter.
Demonstrable how? Infinity cannot even be properly defined and certainly not observed. Math cannot demonstrate infinity non-circularly because it assumes it ab initio.
So if god claims allow you to make useful predictions of the human condition you will accept he exists?
Well that is exactly why I (as an agnostic), choose to do so: Because my general metaphysical outlook on the universe is (to me) simpler and more comprehensive with a god concept than without.
Who are you to question that?