• qyron@sopuli.xyz
    38·
    2 years ago

    So, basically, we don’t know that much on anything besides understanding it’s really complex and difficult to figure out.

      • qyron@sopuli.xyz
        42·
        2 years ago

        To quote someone a lot wiser than myself:

        It’s a shame stupid people carry themselves through life full of certainty while the wise ones suffer a life of doubt.

        • TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.idEnglish
          4·
          2 years ago

          That’s a paraphrase of a famous Bertrand Russell quote. The original is as follows; “The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.”

          There’s also the William Butler Yeats corollary; “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”

      • Sternout@feddit.de
        1·
        2 years ago

        No, before the scientific method was invented, the religious consensus was that “All is known”.

          • no banana@lemmy.world
            21·
            2 years ago

            The Bible says something about the earth and how it is good and the filament of the sky and something. The Bible that is, at least that’s what I read on the internet. Many fine people on the internet, the best people, but not me, I haven’t said it, but the best people probably. The best people say the earth may be - and I’m not saying it is but they are saying it - they say that the earth may be flat and that doesn’t take much text to cover I have heard.

          • bigfish@reddthat.com
            7·
            2 years ago

            If you squint a little, the 7 days of creation in Genesis are relativistic-ish. 1 day to separate light from darkness (photons at 1 microsecond after Big Bang), another to create the sky (opaque universe at 370k years), another to form dry land and create life (earth formed, 9.3 billion years, life at ~0.2by later), etc etc. Anyone with a physics degree able to say what fraction of light speed god must have been travelling to make this happen such that only days passed for them between these events?

            • flatearth@kbin.social
              18·
              2 years ago

              They are literal days.
              Our God is King of leading by example.
              Also, man was made from the dust of the earth. It was fitting that earth be created before man (also very important for prideful man).
              As He did, so we must do.
              It is repeated constantly that we have 6 days to work, the 7th to be set apart.
              Why?

          • MxM111@kbin.social
            2·
            2 years ago

            You are missing the point. The creation myths were considered complete. Nothing left to be known.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
              61·
              2 years ago

              Well yes, people who believe things that aren’t true won’t admit that they don’t know anything. I’m not sure why that’s relevant though.

              • no banana@lemmy.world
                2·
                2 years ago

                I think their actual point was that incomplete explanations are nonetheless explanations. Still wrong though.

              • MxM111@kbin.social
                1·
                2 years ago

                You stated “this has been always true” to the statement that we have understanding that things are really complex and difficult to figure out. The answer to you was an example that there were times where we did not have such understanding.

              • flatearth@kbin.social
                12·
                2 years ago

                Material things are way below what God planned for man.
                Man was meant to be like God (NB God is not material) (in a good way).
                The Bible is not meant to be a physics textbook.
                Nevertheless, God owns everything. So things were talked about here and there…

                • SatansInteriorDsgnr@lemmy.world
                  2·
                  2 years ago

                  The Bible also isn’t meant to be real. It’s a compendium of stories all put into one book, with tons of different writers. It’s akin to The Odyssey and shouldn’t be taken literally. Zeus didn’t come to Earth as a golden shower to impregnate Danae, and Jesus didn’t come back from the dead. They’re just fables.

            • XIN@lemm.ee
              1·
              2 years ago

              If your point was that religions have oversimplified complex science to the point that people thought they fully grasped it, then I agree with you. Otherwise I have no idea what you are trying to say.

    • MxM111@kbin.social
      213·
      2 years ago

      Actually, we know everything there is happening in solar system. What we don’t know requires energies or distances or times incomparable with human life.

      • bleistift2@feddit.deEnglish
        10·
        2 years ago

        We don’t know why space spawns. We don’t know why the sun’s corona is hotter than its surface. We don’t know why the sun spins faster around its equator than at its poles. We don’t know why shampoo makes strange squiggles when being poured out of its bottle. Just four things off the top of my head.

      • EatYouWell@lemmy.world
        22·
        2 years ago

        That’s one of the most confidently idiotic things I’ve read in a hot minute. Congratulations.

        • SzethFriendOfNimi@lemmy.world
          31·
          2 years ago

          It’s actually a pretty decent list of unanswered questions. The more we know the more we learn new questions.

          Like why there’s anything at all when the matter and antimatter should have annihilated itself.

          Or if there’s positive or negative curvature to space time at the (open or closed universe)

          Or what is dark matter and dark energy.

          Or unifying quantum physics with general relativity.

          And so on.

          • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
            2·
            2 years ago

            That’s the point. It’s not accurate that we always knew how complex these were. The more we learn, the more we learn how complex these things are. The example of spiritual explanations is the most reductive and frankly that is where our understanding started. This conversation has really devolved here in typical Lemmy fashion.

            • flatearth@kbin.social
              01·
              2 years ago

              Many things were revealed to Moyses by God Himself.
              St. Paul was wrapt to the third heaven.
              Also in the book of Job, we see God speak in first person.
              Also there are prophets.
              You are marvelled at what we can do with matter. You little knowledge of what man can do with God.
              In our modern day, we had the Dancing Sun of Fatima (Our Lady of Fatima).

  • maryjayjay@lemmy.world
    15·
    2 years ago

    I highly recommend the book “We Have No Idea” by Jorge Cham and Daniel Whitesom. Great explanations of what we know about the universe (with hilarious comic illustrations) and a profound message of just how much we don’t know.

  • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
    10·
    2 years ago

    I can’t wrap my head around time being anything other than the measurement of movement, and until someone can prove otherwise, that’s where I’ll be.

    • brenticus@lemmy.world
      7·
      2 years ago

      A definition I saw recently that I like is that time is the direction of entropy. You follow time one direction and you get the big bang where everything is chaotic and happening, and in the other direction you get the heat death of the universe, where everything has settled into a base state and nothing’s happening.

      • Hoptrain@lemmy.world
        2·
        2 years ago

        Do you mean, like reverse time? From my understanding of the concept of entropy, it strives to a maximum, meaning maximum disorder, by your definition the big bang.

        Or maybe do you have link where I can look into it? Sounds interesting

        • brenticus@lemmy.world
          1·
          2 years ago

          I wish I had a link, I think acollierastro talked about it briefly in one of her videos but I think it was a sidebar on something else so I have no idea which one. It was just one of those things where I heard the statement and it clicked on some weird intuitive level.

          I probably used “chaotic” inaccurately, but entropy strives towards maximum disorder in that there is energy holding things together and that energy won’t hold forever. The big bang was basically a big explosion where a whole lot of order was imposed on the universe, for example by forming particles, and since then there’s this general trend towards things falling apart. Energy can be used to fuse a particle, but left alone that particle will eventually fall apart, even if it’s not moving. That’s entropy. So time is that quantity where, given enough of it, things fall apart.

          Does that make sense? I have no idea if I’m explaining it properly, my physics background is super scattered.

  • doctorcrimson@lemmy.today
    1·
    2 years ago

    I think high level degree holders know a lot more than the average man thinks we know, in fact I doubt the majority of people even know US High school level stuff like that we’ve discovered a gravitational constant and about the inverse square law as it applies to gravity.

    • crapwittyname@lemm.ee
      0·
      2 years ago

      The sad reason for that is that it’s a conversation killer. I would love to go back and forth for hours on things like the uncanny similarity between universal gravitation and Coulomb’s law. But, when I speak to someone with a similar background to mine it’s all…work-work-work-how-is-it-applied??, and when I speak to someone without that background it’s all yawns. It’s a shame because in either case I think science is the most interesting topic. It’s just as edifying to dive casually into the philosophy as it is to dive rigourously into the maths. I learn more per unit time from either type of conversation than from studying papers. And, it’s a passion, but one whose expression is stymied either by explaining it in terms of football fields per dolphin or by making it marketable. Interaction with other minds is the most valuable type of learning.
      I feel like I may come off as a bit of an elitist writing this, but the problem really is the opposite: I wish more people would get involved!
      Edit: the responses to this have made my day you guys. This is why I left Reddit.

  • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
    0·
    2 years ago

    Copernicus deserves a mention. Galileo’s problems resulted (in part) from him being a proponent of Copernicism after the church had declared it heresy.

    Heliocentrism was suggested by Copernicus and Galileo built on that, including developing physics to the point where he couldn’t believe otherwise.

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      1·
      2 years ago

      The heliocentric models predicted the orbits worse than epicyclic geocentric ones and that is the reason Galileo was told to shut up, the court transcript is like 99% science and then a single subordinate clause saying “it also contradicts the bible”.

      Galileo insisted on circular orbits which was his downfall, ironically “because circles are perfect and god would furnish the universe perfect”: That kind of religious language while also being worse science than what was already established did him in. Kepler, based on Brahe’s data, was the first one to get a heliocentric model right and more accurate than the epicyclic ones.

      Also earth doesn’t revolve around the sun. If anything both revolve around their shared centre of gravity but really it’s a matter of your frame of reference. Paraphrasing Archimedes: Give me a fixed point in the universe and I will move all your models.