It is currently Wed May 24, 2017 1:32 pm

 43 posts • Page 1 of 1
Author Message
marnixR
 Post subject: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2011 6:54 am

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:35 pm
Posts: 4779
Location: Cardiff, Wales

 i'm sure i'm not the only one who is convinced that certain things are true, but have no clear-cut evidence to prove it - you could almost say that it is a working hypothesis where the work of testing the hypothesis hasn't been made yet (and where it may not be all that clear how it would be tested)as an example, here's one of mine :i've always been fascinated by the fact that the timing of the arising of bipedalism in hominids may well coincide with that of the Messinian salinity crisiscould this have been the environmental trigger that made bipedalism an advantageous trait ?i also should mention that i'm a great believer in Stephen J Gould's concept of exaptation, where traits evolve for one reason (or maybe not even for any particular reason) and then get used in a different adaptive framework by natural selection - using that line of reasoning my thinking is that bipedalism already existed in a (semi-)forested environment, but became favoured as an advantageous trait as the result of an environmental changehence my predictions are that bipedal hominids will be found in a fully forested environment (not such a big leap since Ardipithecus was already inhabiting a partly forested environment), that clear environmental changes will be recorded in the period 5.96 - 5.33Ma in the environment where those hominids are found, and that these changes would make a bipedal stance advantageous over knuckle walkinghowever, since this would require the right type of fossils being found at the right time in the geological column somewhere in the northern half of africa, i could be in for a long wait, and if my conjecture is wrong then the long wait would be a very long one _________________"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)"Someone is WRONG on the internet" (xkcd)
Hermit
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2011 3:36 am

Original Member

Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 5:31 am
Posts: 399

 You would need a lot more data than that to convince me. Bipedalism evolved in Africa, and may well have evolved 1000 kms or more away from the Mediterranean. Even the correlation is pretty damn weak, since the date by which bipedalism evolved has such a large set of error bars.My own personal theory is that bipedalism is a by product of tool use. We know that the rise of humanity 'coincides' with the rise in use of tools and weapons. If a population of apes learned to make good use of tools, then there is an obvious advantage to being able to carry a favoured tool or weapon, and make full use of it. But that ties up a fore limb, which cannot be used in quadrupedal locomotion. Upright stance and bipedal locomotion would clearly be an advantage, allowing a tool or weapon to be carried, and allowing it to be wielded with much greater effect.
marnixR
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2011 6:12 am

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:35 pm
Posts: 4779
Location: Cardiff, Wales

 the only problem with that statement is that it can't be proved and is unlikely to ever to be proved : a bipedal stance definitely precedes stone tools, and tools from other materials are very unlikely to make into the fossil record after more than a few 100,000 yearswhereas my conviction comes from recognising a pattern, which, given the appropriate finds in the fossil record, might one day be (dis)proved _________________"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)"Someone is WRONG on the internet" (xkcd)
15uliane
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 7:28 pm

Original Member

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 9:09 pm
Posts: 110
Location: Boston

 nervous tissue is a high temp superconductor, the brain communicates in binary and is a supercomputer. Totally ridiculous, i know.
marnixR
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 8:14 pm

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:35 pm
Posts: 4779
Location: Cardiff, Wales

 is this something you're convinced of in the face of evidence that appears to contradict these notions ? _________________"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)"Someone is WRONG on the internet" (xkcd)
Hermit
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 11:05 pm

Original Member

Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 5:31 am
Posts: 399

 There are a lot of things I am convinced of that cannot be proved, starting with own existence. How do you know I am not a computer glitch?
marnixR
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 7:03 am

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:35 pm
Posts: 4779
Location: Cardiff, Wales

 if you were then you obviously have passed the Turing test _________________"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)"Someone is WRONG on the internet" (xkcd)
bunbury
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:38 pm
Original Member

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2011 5:55 am
Posts: 978

 Quote:convinced that certain things are true, but have no clear-cut evidence to prove it There is a Republican politician somewhere who is smarter than the six (or so) who are competing for the party's nomination.
iNow
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:38 am

Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:40 pm
Posts: 5521
Location: Austin, Texas

 I'm convinced my boss is probably not really an idiot, but I'll be damned if I can find any evidence to prove it. _________________iNow"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition." ~C. Sagan
15uliane
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 4:41 pm

Original Member

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 9:09 pm
Posts: 110
Location: Boston

 Quote:is this something you're convinced of in the face of evidence that appears to contradict these notions ?I'm not very educated on neuroscience, so I don't have any contrary evidence. I guess I'm not really convinced of it because I know their's evidence out there that contradicts that belief. It's more a fantasy.
Hermit
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 7:00 pm

Original Member

Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 5:31 am
Posts: 399

 15uliane wrote:I'm not very educated on neuroscience, so I don't have any contrary evidence. I guess I'm not really convinced of it because I know their's evidence out there that contradicts that belief. It's more a fantasy.You are entitled to have your fantasies. I have a very enjoyable one that involves Angelina Jolie .....However, if you aspire to be a good rational thinker, it is also a good idea to bone up at least a little on this subject. There is plenty of easy to read literature covering the basics of this topic.
iNow
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2011 2:24 am

Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:40 pm
Posts: 5521
Location: Austin, Texas

 Hermit wrote:There is plenty of easy to read literature covering the basics of this topic.Like this: http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/ap.htmlIt's an interesting idea, though.I'm convinced that engineers are more likely to deny global warming and evolution than physicists, but I cannot prove it. _________________iNow"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition." ~C. Sagan
mississippichem
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 1:44 pm

Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2011 6:11 pm
Posts: 42
Location: South Nowhereville, USA

 iNow wrote:I'm convinced that engineers are more likely to deny global warming and evolution than physicists, but I cannot prove it.We once had an epic creationist troll on SFN that claimed to be a chemical engineer. I honestly don't think he would've been much of an engineer or chemist though as his understanding of entropy and the 2nd law of thermodynamics was horrendous.I wouldn't want him designing my pilot plant since he doesn't understand Carnot cycles! That's for sure.
KALSTER
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 7:13 am
Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 7:15 am
Posts: 198

 Sounds a bit like the king of all creationist trolls on the parent site, with the ironic name "archaeologist". Man, was I glad when he got banned.Difficult to find something I'm convinced of, but can't prove. Oh, there is no god as described by the major religions, but I am quite convinced that beings exist somewhere that would pass for gods to a great many of us. Not convinced of it, but I have a strong suspicion that all of physics will one day be describable through fluid dynamics and the topological constructs the small set of rules governing the fluid are capable of. _________________"Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
iNow
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 4:25 pm

Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:40 pm
Posts: 5521
Location: Austin, Texas

 I'm pretty certain he means Cypress, who was also banned from TSF.com.KALSTER wrote:Difficult to find something I'm convinced of, but can't prove. Oh, there is no god as described by the major religions, but I am quite convinced that beings exist somewhere that would pass for gods to a great many of us. I am convinced that god does not exist, but I can't prove it. _________________iNow"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition." ~C. Sagan
KALSTER
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:04 pm
Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 7:15 am
Posts: 198

 Quote:I'm pretty certain he means Cypress, who was also banned from TSF.com.Oh god, even the mention of his name makes me want to flee in the opposite direction. Quote:I am convinced that god does not exist, but I can't prove it.That's what I started out to say and then my mind wandered. Mmmm eggs on toast... _________________"Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
SkinWalker
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:49 pm

Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 10:57 pm
Posts: 432

 I think it was I who terminated both of their accounts. Cypress was an interesting individual. I don't think he believed some or perhaps most of what he argued here. I'm pretty sure he was a chemical engineer and I think I even figured out his real name once when I was trying to decide if he was a sock-puppet. He had this tendency to argue points then deflect and obfuscate with a dozen tangents. Archaeologist pissed me off right away just for chosing the name 'archaeologist.' He was getting so abused for his out-right crazy-ness that I think I terminated his account more to protect him than us! I believe I love my wife. But I can't prove it.
x(x-y)
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2011 5:30 pm

Original Member

Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2011 3:44 pm
Posts: 298
Location: UK

 I am convinced that Colonel Gaddafi was killed purposely and unlawfully in order to prevent him from telling the secrets of dirty deals with the west (particularly Blair, Bush, Sarkozy, Berlusconi and even Obama) at the Hague, but I cannot prove it. [i.e. to prevent him from "spilling the beans", it think it will be very telling if Saif Al Islam is killed too...] _________________"Nature doesn't care what we call it, she just does it anyway".- Feynman
KALSTER
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 10:00 am
Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 7:15 am
Posts: 198

 x(x-y) wrote:I am convinced that Colonel Gaddafi was killed purposely and unlawfully in order to prevent him from telling the secrets of dirty deals with the west (particularly Blair, Bush, Sarkozy, Berlusconi and even Obama) at the Hague, but I cannot prove it. [i.e. to prevent him from "spilling the beans", it think it will be very telling if Saif Al Islam is killed too...]I am convinced that he was killed, because there is no clear good vs evil dynamic in the human condition. With the case of Lybia for instance, you have a bad side and a slightly less bad side. I am pretty sure was simply killed because he was the principle enemy of the rebels. _________________"Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
marnixR
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 9:32 pm

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:35 pm
Posts: 4779
Location: Cardiff, Wales

 KALSTER wrote:I am pretty sure was simply killed because he was the principle enemy of the rebels.but just like 95% of all opinion, you can't PROVE that - oh, that was the whole point of this thread, wasn't it ? ;p _________________"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)"Someone is WRONG on the internet" (xkcd)
MeteorWayne
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Sat Nov 12, 2011 4:05 am
Original Member

Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 1:13 am
Posts: 133

 bunbury wrote:Quote:convinced that certain things are true, but have no clear-cut evidence to prove it There is a Republican politician somewhere who is smarter than the six (or so) who are competing for the party's nomination.I know it's late, but ROFLPIMP!!!!
MeteorWayne
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Sat Nov 12, 2011 4:08 am
Original Member

Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 1:13 am
Posts: 133

 SkinWalker wrote:I think it was I who terminated both of their accounts. Cypress was an interesting individual. I don't think he believed some or perhaps most of what he argued here. I'm pretty sure he was a chemical engineer and I think I even figured out his real name once when I was trying to decide if he was a sock-puppet. He had this tendency to argue points then deflect and obfuscate with a dozen tangents. Archaeologist pissed me off right away just for chosing the name 'archaeologist.' He was getting so abused for his out-right crazy-ness that I think I terminated his account more to protect him than us! I believe I love my wife. But I can't prove it.Being a mod is a tough life, been there, done that. Donating free time to herd cats. Just wanted to let you know it's apprecatedMW
x(x-y)
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:50 pm

Original Member

Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2011 3:44 pm
Posts: 298
Location: UK

 I am convinced that David Cameron's face becomes fatter with every lie he tells, but, unfortunately, I cannot prove it. _________________"Nature doesn't care what we call it, she just does it anyway".- Feynman
marnixR
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 9:03 pm

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:35 pm
Posts: 4779
Location: Cardiff, Wales

 you could at least try to establish a correlation, even if that is no proof of causality _________________"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)"Someone is WRONG on the internet" (xkcd)
x(x-y)
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2012 8:03 pm

Original Member

Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2011 3:44 pm
Posts: 298
Location: UK

 _________________"Nature doesn't care what we call it, she just does it anyway".- Feynman
tridimity
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 8:44 pm

Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 5:55 pm
Posts: 1117

 Quote:I believe I love my wife. But I can't prove it. You could take blood serum samples before and after seeing your wife and assay for oxytocin and vasopressin concentrations. Repeat until the n numbers have sufficient power, and perform a paired t-test. _________________gone also
tridimity
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 8:49 pm

Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 5:55 pm
Posts: 1117

 I am convinced that there is an ultimate reality that exists independent of our senses, but i cannot prove it. i.e. if a tree falls in a wood and there is no-one to hear it, it makes a noise _________________gone also
Moontanman
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2013 10:47 pm

Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 5:02 pm
Posts: 281

 I am convinced that at least some UFOs are alien space craft and I have a falsifiable hypothesis concerning this....
iNow
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:21 pm

Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:40 pm
Posts: 5521
Location: Austin, Texas

 MOD NOTE: Discussion on the point above about aliens has been split into its own thread. post12610.html#p12610 _________________iNow"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition." ~C. Sagan
Moontanman
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 8:20 pm

Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 5:02 pm
Posts: 281

 marnixR wrote:i'm sure i'm not the only one who is convinced that certain things are true, but have no clear-cut evidence to prove it - you could almost say that it is a working hypothesis where the work of testing the hypothesis hasn't been made yet (and where it may not be all that clear how it would be tested)as an example, here's one of mine :i've always been fascinated by the fact that the timing of the arising of bipedalism in hominids may well coincide with that of the Messinian salinity crisiscould this have been the environmental trigger that made bipedalism an advantageous trait ?i also should mention that i'm a great believer in Stephen J Gould's concept of exaptation, where traits evolve for one reason (or maybe not even for any particular reason) and then get used in a different adaptive framework by natural selection - using that line of reasoning my thinking is that bipedalism already existed in a (semi-)forested environment, but became favoured as an advantageous trait as the result of an environmental changehence my predictions are that bipedal hominids will be found in a fully forested environment (not such a big leap since Ardipithecus was already inhabiting a partly forested environment), that clear environmental changes will be recorded in the period 5.96 - 5.33Ma in the environment where those hominids are found, and that these changes would make a bipedal stance advantageous over knuckle walkinghowever, since this would require the right type of fossils being found at the right time in the geological column somewhere in the northern half of africa, i could be in for a long wait, and if my conjecture is wrong then the long wait would be a very long oneGibbons, when traveling on the ground, are bipedal... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GibbonQuote:Also called the lesser apes, gibbons differ from great apes (chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans and humans) in being smaller, exhibiting low sexual dimorphism, in not making nests, and in certain anatomical details in which they superficially more closely resemble monkeys than great apes do. But like all apes, gibbons evolved to become tailless. Gibbons also display pair-bonding, unlike most of the great apes. Gibbons are masters of their primary mode of locomotion, brachiation, swinging from branch to branch for distances of up to 15 m (50 ft), at speeds as high as 55 km/h (34 mph). They can also make leaps of up to 8 m (26 ft), and walk bipedally with their arms raised for balance. They are the fastest and most agile of all tree-dwelling, non-flying mammals.No ape other than humans walk bipedally as their natural gait...
iNow
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2016 2:50 am

Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:40 pm
Posts: 5521
Location: Austin, Texas

 I'm convinced of this, but cannot prove it: _________________iNow"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition." ~C. Sagan
wegs
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Tue May 24, 2016 3:37 am

Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 3:48 am
Posts: 77

 I'm convinced that ghosts exist, but I can't prove it. Why am I convinced then? It just seems unlikely that all of the subjective experiences of people who have ''witnessed'' the paranormal, or have explored it, could be wrong. Don't judge me, this thread asked for something, so I provided it.
iNow
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Tue May 24, 2016 3:46 am

Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:40 pm
Posts: 5521
Location: Austin, Texas

 Lol. I'm convinced that the addition of children to a household decrease the frequency of sex among the parents, but cannot prove it. _________________iNow"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition." ~C. Sagan
iNow
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Tue May 24, 2016 3:47 am

Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:40 pm
Posts: 5521
Location: Austin, Texas

 I'm convinced that consumption of different types of alcohol leads to different types of drunkeness despite the same underlying chemistry being at play, but I cannot prove it. _________________iNow"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition." ~C. Sagan
wegs
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Tue May 24, 2016 3:49 am

Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 3:48 am
Posts: 77

 iNow wrote:I'm convinced that consumption of different types of alcohol leads to different types of drunkeness despite the same underlying chemistry being at play, but I cannot prove it.I think that can be proven lol
Snafuperman
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Wed May 25, 2016 11:34 pm

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2015 7:34 pm
Posts: 217

 iNow wrote:I'm convinced that consumption of different types of alcohol leads to different types of drunkeness despite the same underlying chemistry being at play, but I cannot prove it.I agree! Tequila makes for a crazy drunk.
plusminusgravity
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Thu May 26, 2016 5:45 pm

Joined: Thu May 26, 2016 5:24 pm
Posts: 23

 I'm convinced that people are probably being cloned and having research done on them, but I can't find any evidence to prove it.Just seems like they'd clone people without adding a certain aspect to their brain where they can remember or cognitively understand what's going on. _________________“Mediocrity is self-inflicted and genius is self-bestowed.” ― Walter Russell
Olinguito
 Post subject:   |  Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2016 12:18 pm

Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 3:56 pm
Posts: 136

 I'm convinced the Universe is a 3-dimensional manifold embedded in 4-dimensional hyperspace.Mathematically, a manifold is a space embedded in the space of the next higher dimension in which every point is locally "flat". For example: the surface of the sphere is a 2-dimensional manifold (embedded in 3 dimensions). Close up, the surface appears "flat". The technical definition is this: An n-dimensional (real) manifold is a topological subspace $\displaystyle M^n$ of $\displaystyle \mathbb R^{n+1}$ such that given any point x in $\displaystyle M^n$ there exists a real number $\displaystyle \delta_x>0$ (depending on x) such that the open ball $\displaystyle B_{\delta_x}(x) = \{y\in M^n:|x-y|<\delta_x\}$ is homeomorphic to $\displaystyle \mathbb R^n$.Let us use the surface of the sphere as an analogy. As I've said, the surface looks flat over a small area – so much so that to a flatlander living in that area, the surface appears to be an infinite 2D plane extending boundlessly in all directions. But the surface is not boundless: it is finite. In the same way, the Universe may appear boundless on a small scale – we think we see space as infinitely stretchable in every direction we look – but the Universe (so I believe) is finite in the way the surface of a sphere is finite.Lines that are "straight" on the surface of a sphere are actually curved in the 3D space the surface is embedded in; they're arcs of great circles. Travelling on a straight line on the surface means moving along the circumference of a great circle such as the equator. If you keep travelling along this "straight" line, you will eventually end up where you started from. Indeed, no matter how you move on the surface, you can never escape from it. In the same way, I'm convinced that straight lines in the Universe are actually curved in the 4D hyperspace in which I believe the Universe to be embedded. If, starting at a point in the Universe, we could keep travelling on and on in a straight line, we would eventually end up where we started! This is because lines that are straight in 3D are actually curved in 4D hyperspace. And no matter how we move around in the Universe, we will never escape from it.Back to the sphere analogy. If the radius of the sphere increases, the surface area also increases: the world of the flatlander expands. This, I believe, is also why our 3D Universe is expanding: because the hyper-radius of 4D hyperspace is increasing. The Big Bang was the moment at which this hyper-radius was zero.And this is my metaphysical theory of the Universe – which I will never be able to prove. I don't expect anyone to agree with me anyway (or even understand what I'm saying in the first place). _________________Blog
iNow
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2016 1:29 pm

Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:40 pm
Posts: 5521
Location: Austin, Texas

 I followed (most of it) and suspect it aligns with a lot of other thinking in cosmology right now. _________________iNow"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition." ~C. Sagan
anticorncob28
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 4:53 am

Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 10:31 pm
Posts: 32

 My list:*pi, tau (=2pi), e, sqrt(593) + ln(15.4), and all other such ordinary irrational numbers contain every finite string of digits in every integer base. Not only that but with equal frequency, hence they are normal. The only irrational numbers we conceive that are not normal are those easily constructed against it, such as Liouville's constant.*Aliens exist.*The Euler-Mascheroni constant is irrational.*The universe is finite.That last one is of great interest to me. I'd love to know the size of the universe, and I would be disappointed to find out that it's infinitely large. I've seen finite estimates of 250, 10^23, and 10^10^10^122 times bigger than the observable universe. I hope the 250 times bigger one is right (the smaller, the better). _________________"Climate change is the canvas on which the history of the 21st century will be painted."-Mark Lynas, Six Degrees: Our Future on a Hotter Planet
shlunka
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2017 9:23 pm

Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2013 4:55 pm
Posts: 54
Location: Virginia, US

 anticorncob28 wrote:My list:*pi, tau (=2pi), e, sqrt(593) + ln(15.4), and all other such ordinary irrational numbers contain every finite string of digits in every integer base. Not only that but with equal frequency, hence they are normal. The only irrational numbers we conceive that are not normal are those easily constructed against it, such as Liouville's constant.*Aliens exist.*The Euler-Mascheroni constant I s irrational.*The universe is finite.That last one is of great interest to me. I'd love to know the size of the universe, and I would be disappointed to find out that it's infinitely large. I've seen finite estimates of 250, 10^23, and 10^10^10^122 times bigger than the observable universe. I hope the 250 times bigger one is right (the smaller, the better).One must whistle while thinking about this. Whistle to the notes of a number in decimal notation being converted into a base in its expanded version via repeated division. Convert the signs (b, c,n,q) into notes and the numbers into the duration of notes. _________________John Hancock was here.
Falconer360
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:01 pm

Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 10:30 pm
Posts: 969
Location: Somewhere in the Great State of Washington

 I'm convinced that Ken Ham has a higher percentage of Neanderthal DNA than the average person, but I can't prove it. _________________"For every moment of triumph, for every instance of beauty, many souls must be trampled." Hunter S Thompson"It is easy to kill someone with a slash of a sword. It is hard to be impossible for others to cut down" - Yagyu Munenori
azazello666
 Post subject: Re: things you're convinced of but can't prove  |  Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2017 12:11 pm

Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 12:02 pm
Posts: 1

 I´m convinced that we are living in a simulated reality. And I think there are lots of proof for that (but I don´t think everyone agrees) Here I have collected all the proof and indication of that we are living in a simulated reality.Enjoy LINK REMOVED
 Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
 43 posts • Page 1 of 1

Who is online
 Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forum