Is the overwhelming weight of empirical evidence more or less than the combined weight of Andy Carroll and Charlie Adam?
Classical Physics is abstract. like the wobbles in a star that point to an orbiting celestial body, the math can tell us the size and density of the planet even though we cannot see it, the tangible math can tell us the variations in the star's wobble, the star's mass ect, we can see this so it is a solid foundation to measure effects against. it is like this with Dark matter except that the solid starting point becomes lost in a sea of theory standing upon theory. Sure we're up to 10 dimensions now if string theory is to be believed, not a fan of that theory at all. Then there are those that think Quarks are pixels and that we're all part of the SIMS Cosmologist is now akin to playing tetris, make it up as you go along, keep coming up with ideas until something fits
'empirical' Lol. Any decent physicist will tel you that your evidence is only as good as your tools you use to measure and those tools get better and better all of the time and the information changes, 'empirical' data is funnily enough is far too dynamic for somehting to be used as evidence. it should mean,' Our current understanding is..' and not any evidence at all. A particle could be a wave or a paritcle when measured went the 'empirical' data and now someone has recently measured momentum and position together, because the tools were better. Example, i have a ruler thats to within 1" accuracy I meaasure say 5" 10i" So my margin of error is 1" if I measure myself again and I can measure 5' 11" because again my margin of error is 1", two different readings, but you might have said 5'10" was 'empirical' evidence but here I am 5' 11" on the second measure seconds later with the same rule.
Wouldn't it be to within 1" accuracy over a certain length? Cos if it's accurate to 1", and the thing you're measuring is only 2" long, that's a massive margin to be out by. Should it be classed as say 98.6% accurate? (1" out per 5'11" / 71") Sorry, I only read your post and the post above, so I'm probably talking a load of bollocks...
I am saying with a 1" accurace I can say I am 5 11 or 5 10 to within 1 inch of accurace, either way, it is not a definitive answer as the tools are not accurate enough, ie the crappy rule with no cm or mm, even then that may not be accurate enough depending the application of the data obtained, like with electronics, nano tech ect. All we can aim for is an acceptable margin of error. I talk bollox all of the time apparently, so its cool matey, you can a go for a change I guess
So there's no such thing as a stright line, 2+2 may or may not equal 4 and the weatherman still cannot tell me if it will rain tomorrow - life's just not worth living. Oh yes it is! that great Wurlitzer of hopes, dreams and passions is only a matter of days away
You lot can keep your experimental physics, I'll stick to my drugs that you'll need when the stress gets to you (it inevitably will if you think about the universe long enough).
Was it on there, it does usually post the scores even for pre- season so was the first place I looked.
It wasn't a pre season friendly it was a charity match. Half our side in it dont play for us. Also didnt we have barthez in goal or somthing like that. I confeess i didn't watch it.
