"The 20 big questions in science"

Originally posted by humy
Personally, I don't know what the 'big' questions in science should be, but I note that I am incline to think in everyday life not of the big philosophical equations but mainly ones of more immediate practical importance such as:

How do high temperature superconductors really work?

When will we have complete understanding of how they work?

Is room temp ...[text shortened]... or otherwise and it seems to be taking me an eternity to write my book! It may take a few years.

Good luck with that one🙂

Originally posted by sonhouse
Good luck with that one🙂

Thanks🙂
fortunately,it depends more on logic than luck and I have already created a good skeleton of the solutions to all these problems (in the case of the problem of induction, resolution rather than strictly a solution for it has no solution but I can prove it to be a trivial problem and science is saved ) -just a few not-insurmountable loose ends to sort out and then the harder part which is to give the whole lot mathematical vigour which I fear could be very tedious and take consuming part of it. I will have to revise a lot of mathematics and Bayesian logic equations some of which I would need to modify to adapt to my system of logic that I call "ufductive logic" (the "uf" in "ufductive" comes from Ultimate First principle )

I would be glad to discuss the skeleton of these solutions here if any one is interested.

Originally posted by humy
Thanks🙂
fortunately,it depends more on logic than luck and I have already created a good skeleton of the solutions to all these problems (in the case of the problem of induction, resolution rather than strictly a solution for it has no solution but I can prove it to be a trivial problem and science is saved ) -just a few not-insurmountable loose ends to sort ...[text shortened]... e )

I would be glad to discuss the skeleton of these solutions here if any one is interested.

Does the solution reach INTO the skeleton? You know, like fractal effects you may have no control over?
I bet you never took into account fractilazation, that will extend the needed math solutions into the supercomputer area, you may need Exaflop solutions for that.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Does the solution reach INTO the skeleton? You know, like fractal effects you may have no control over?
I bet you never took into account fractilazation, that will extend the needed math solutions into the supercomputer area, you may need Exaflop solutions for that.

I don't think I need to deal much with “fractal effects” and “fractilazation” but rather, although this is traditionally not used much in epistemology, I have already worked out that I will need to deal with a lot of weighted averages but in a rather subtle and complex way.
I would also have to deal with just a bit of boolean algebra but applied in a rather subtle way.
I would also use a lot of conventional bayesian logic but not for the first part where I talk about first principles and what I mean by the ultimate first principle and where that comes from nor the least part where I completely solve the reference class problem using a new kind of reasoning.

Originally posted by humy
I don't think I need to deal much with “fractal effects” and “fractilazation” but rather, although this is traditionally not used much in epistemology, I have already worked out that I will need to deal with a lot of weighted averages but in a rather subtle and complex way.
I would also have to deal with just a bit of boolean algebra but applied in a rather su ...[text shortened]... e least part where I completely solve the reference class problem using a new kind of reasoning.

The kind of uber reasoning system I think you are proposing is going to require multi dimensional functions also, like Riemann space analysis, you may need to go to as much as 6th dimensional vector analysis to do that accurately.

Originally posted by twhitehead
3. and 15.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Of "The 20 big questions in science" which do you find most interesting?

Originally posted by twhitehead
3. and 15.
_________________________________

5 What is consciousness?

We're still not really sure. We do know that it's to do with different brain regions networked together rather than a single part of the brain. The thinking goes that if we figure out which bits of the brain are involved and how the neural circuitry works, we'll figure out how consciousness emerges, something that artificial intelligence and attempts to build a brain neuron by neuron may help with. The harder, more philosophical, question is why anything should be conscious in the first place. A good suggestion is that by integrating and processing lots of information, as well as focusing and blocking out rather than reacting to the sensory inputs bombarding us, we can distinguish between what's real and what's not and imagine multiple future scenarios that help us adapt and survive." (5 of 20 - to be continued)

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/sep/01/20-big-questions-in-science

twhitehead, humy, Kewpie and sonhouse, mine is "5. What is consciousness". I'd welcome each of your insights.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Of "The 20 big questions in science" which do you find most interesting?

Originally posted by twhitehead
3. and 15.
_________________________________

[b]5 What is consciousness?

We're still not really sure. We do know that it's to do with different brain regions networked together rather th ...[text shortened]... umy, Kewpie and sonhouse, mine is "5. What is consciousness". I'd welcome each of your insights.[/b]

"consciousness" has no scientific definition and is not a scientific concept.
While I don't doubt that it exists (because I directly experience it thus it is to me an empirical fact ) , When it comes to consciousness, literally nobody knows what they are talking about including myself. I can only say what it isn't, but not much about what it is beyond it being a process of most parts of the brain which isn't really saying much.