Re: $1 Trillion Bitcoin (physics derail)

[rpietila]

- - for completeness of argument the whole reason I needed YOU to supply a definition of "wave" - -

ROTFL.

This is a compliment, I have used it perhaps once during my 1000+ posts in this forum so far 

[1714870289]

1714870289

[1714870289]

1714870289

[bitleif]

Nerd wank fest! Big nerd wank fest over here!

Sorry I spun (multiple puns intended) this thread so far off topic with my black hole comment. Whatever the original topic was ...

[arepo]

Now, though this is also mentioned only for completeness, you obviously cannot have verified with your own hands that the terms used in physics are not nonsense. What you have verified is a certain set of facts that I am probably not disputing at all. I never said that physics is "wrong," as in F is not equal to ma, but that it answers the wrong questions and uses semantic obfuscation to cover up this fact. It's a serious problem, and every scientist should lament it.

the only problem here is that you're conflating philosophy and science. no scientist ever claimed that they could tell you what light is, only how it behaves. you also continue to use layman's terms and non-rigorous definitions, and then claim that those definitions suck. this is called strawmanning.

the 'wave-packet' (or wave-particle duality) model is just as consistent as the wave model itself. it's incredibly hard for anybody, even scientists, to 'imagine what that means', because nobody said that the universe is supposed to be intuitive and easy-to-understand.

we will never be able to tell you what matter is, what gravity is, et cetera. the words themselves refer to models, which are just brainstuff (memes, if you're familiar with the scientific meaning of that term). but the models reflect reality, and anyone can check this, and that is science. between the questions of "WHY" and "HOW", science answers the latter, intentionally (and not dishonestly) ignores the first, and demonstrates that we really do not have to know WHY forces exist in the first place in order to manipulate them. nor may science ever be able to answer that question, and this is a limitation that is well-known. would an answer to that even be useful in the way an answer to 'how' is? and you claim that it's useless altogether, because it's missing this? all science is pseudoscience based on this ridiculous definition, and we 'know' nothing, really.

also, you are entirely incapable of holding this argument without strawmanning because of your lack of knowledge of the subject matter. this will be my last comment on this point. you seem to think that physics is just magic, and we'll "never be able to fully understand it", but you probably think computers and combustion engines are magic, too.

physics satisfies any workable definition of 'science', and it really astounds me that you believe otherwise..

again, i ask you to use the perspective of someone who doesn't understand bitcoin, and see that you are making an analogous argument to 'bitcoin is not money', or any other argument-from-ignorance that we've seen across the years.

back to topic...

[Apraksin]

Nerd wank fest! Big nerd wank fest over here!

Hahahaha

[jbord39]

Alright Zangelbert...

Here it is. 

You just don't understand physics.  The concepts are not easy and cannot easily be explained well with words.  When they are described strange words like 'want' and 'feel' or 'see' are used to explain phenomena that formula explain better and more completely.  What you are doing is called misapplying.

You also shat on physics saying that engineering is what actually accomplishes things like cell phones, gps, etc etc.  I am an engineer--an electrical engineer in fact--who is very much involved in the creation of electronic devices.  Electrons, like light, also have a wave-particle duality (as do all things).  Take for example a tunneling diode.  In this device, electrons wavefunction (as described by Schrodingers equation) extends through an impenetrable barrier.  Here, electrons will behave like waves and sometimes, miraculously, show up at the other side of the barrier and create a current.  These are used ALL THE TIME and are INCREDIBLY PREDICTABLE.  Those nonsense equations from physics? Yeah they predicted it.

Or take Carbon Nanotube Transistors.  Here, electrons travel via ballistic transport.  This means they are like bullets, and much more particle like. 

This seemingly opposite behavior does not mean physics are wrong--engineers make things everyday using these equations.

What it means is that you do not have a good enough grasp of the concept.

[jbord39]

I should also say that I don't think a B.S. in physics gives you anywhere near what is required to develop fractal or Fibonacci or whatever analysis on bitcoins.

To do this well, in my opinion, you would need a PhD in Finance with a background heavy in algorithmic techniques.

A B.S. in physics means that you know a little bit about all of physics but nothing very well.

[uMMcQxCWELNzkt]

After throwing into question the concept of infinite, lets fall deeper down the rabbit hole.

"Who needs physics when you have metaphysics."

[arepo]

I should also say that I don't think a B.S. in physics gives you anywhere near what is required to develop fractal or Fibonacci or whatever analysis on bitcoins.

To do this well, in my opinion, you would need a PhD in Finance with a background heavy in algorithmic techniques.

A B.S. in physics means that you know a little bit about all of physics but nothing very well.

while what you say is true, i can't tell if this is a stab at my credentials or what?

a B.S. in physics is what taught me how to model previously unknown things within a mathematical framework stepwise, through a process of hypothesize --> test --> hypothesize -- > test --> etc --> conclude.

a PhD in finance with a specialization in stochastic calculus would definitely be more impressive but it's not a two-way relation.

but thanks for the backup

--arepo

[ZephramC]

I am too tired for this philosophical debate. :-]

[jbord39]

I should also say that I don't think a B.S. in physics gives you anywhere near what is required to develop fractal or Fibonacci or whatever analysis on bitcoins.

To do this well, in my opinion, you would need a PhD in Finance with a background heavy in algorithmic techniques.

A B.S. in physics means that you know a little bit about all of physics but nothing very well.

while what you say is true, i can't tell if this is a stab at my credentials or what?

a B.S. in physics is what taught me how to model previously unknown things within a mathematical framework stepwise, through a process of hypothesize --> test --> hypothesize -- > test --> etc --> conclude.

a PhD in finance with a specialization in stochastic calculus would definitely be more impressive but it's not a two-way relation.

but thanks for the backup

--arepo

Not at all a stab at your credentials.  I don't think any B.S. will prepare you for it. 

[arepo]

Not at all a stab at your credentials.  I don't think any B.S. will prepare you for it. 

appreciated. nothing but diving in -- not even forex trading -- prepares you for bitcoin

[notme]

I should also say that I don't think a B.S. in physics gives you anywhere near what is required to develop fractal or Fibonacci or whatever analysis on bitcoins.

To do this well, in my opinion, you would need a PhD in Finance with a background heavy in algorithmic techniques.

In computer science we call that type of analysis data mining.  It is the process of modeling data using a variety of methods in order to make accurate predictions.  And no, you don' t need a PhD in finance to do analysis like that.  Physicists developed the mathematical basis of most data mining techniques, as they needed it to extract models from piles of experimental data.  Mendelbrot's fractals and Fibonacci's sequences (and many other contributions) we developed by mathematicians studying nature and are widely applied mathematics techniques that finance has adopted.

Data mining and signal processing techniques are well known and understood by many more people than the dollar jockeys.

A B.S. in physics means that you know a little bit about all of physics but nothing very well.

A wise man doesn't stop learning once he stops attending classes.  You shouldn't make assumptions about strangers, they give away your ideals.

[jbord39]

A B.S. in physics means that you know a little bit about all of physics but nothing very well.

A wise man doesn't stop learning once he stops attending classes.  You shouldn't make assumptions about strangers, they give away your ideals.

No a wise man doesn't (and since I am working on my graduate degree now that 'ideal' you hint at me having has not yet taken root).  However most people do.  And trusting in something with a complicated name that YOU don't understand because someone says they got a B.S. in physics is a sure way to get burned (as proven today).  Especially when a physics degree does not directly prepare you for that complicated thing.

[notme]

A B.S. in physics means that you know a little bit about all of physics but nothing very well.

A wise man doesn't stop learning once he stops attending classes.  You shouldn't make assumptions about strangers, they give away your ideals.

No a wise man doesn't (and since I am working on my graduate degree now that 'ideal' you hint at me having has not yet taken root).  However most people do.  And trusting in something with a complicated name that YOU don't understand because someone says they got a B.S. in physics is a sure way to get burned (as proven today).  Especially when a physics degree does not directly prepare you for that complicated thing.

Good points.

However, if you admit you don't understand what he is talking about, so you don't really have much to add besides reminding people not to take internet forums as gospel.

[jbord39]

A B.S. in physics means that you know a little bit about all of physics but nothing very well.

A wise man doesn't stop learning once he stops attending classes.  You shouldn't make assumptions about strangers, they give away your ideals.

No a wise man doesn't (and since I am working on my graduate degree now that 'ideal' you hint at me having has not yet taken root).  However most people do.  And trusting in something with a complicated name that YOU don't understand because someone says they got a B.S. in physics is a sure way to get burned (as proven today).  Especially when a physics degree does not directly prepare you for that complicated thing.

Good points.

However, if you admit you don't understand what he is talking about, so you don't really have much to add besides reminding people not to take internet forums as gospel.

Well understanding the concept and correctly implementing it are different things.  Stop making assumptions about me that I did not say.  I said YOU.  Because 99% of the people on this forum do not understand it.

[notme]

A B.S. in physics means that you know a little bit about all of physics but nothing very well.

A wise man doesn't stop learning once he stops attending classes.  You shouldn't make assumptions about strangers, they give away your ideals.

No a wise man doesn't (and since I am working on my graduate degree now that 'ideal' you hint at me having has not yet taken root).  However most people do.  And trusting in something with a complicated name that YOU don't understand because someone says they got a B.S. in physics is a sure way to get burned (as proven today).  Especially when a physics degree does not directly prepare you for that complicated thing.

Good points.

However, if you admit you don't understand what he is talking about, so you don't really have much to add besides reminding people not to take internet forums as gospel.

Well understanding the concept and correctly implementing it are different things.  Stop making assumptions about me that I did not say.  I said YOU.  Because 99% of the people on this forum do not understand it.

Oh, so you're making assumptions about me .  Get a life dude.  We don't need you to babysit us.