I liked The Golden Compass movie but the books were a mess.How do you feel about dark matter?
Great example! The rotation of galaxies should tear themselves apart. They don't. They behave as if there is more gravity holding them together than all the visible matter we can identify. The galaxies behave as if they have more "matter". This "matter" if that's what it is doesn't appear to interact with light the way regular matter does. It behaves as if it's "dark".How do you feel about dark matter?
Dark matter is a conjecture that, to date, doesn't have a valid hypothesis to test. Various hypotheses on the nature of dark matter have been proposed and dismissed for lack of falsifiability. General relativity fails to match observation so I can see why dark matter was proposed and I don't see any issue with the proposal. Someone just needs to figure out a way to test the proposal.How do you feel about dark matter?
All matter matters!Boy, that woke catholic, agnostic, atheist baby eating President Biden sure knows how to funnel dark matter funds through China via Kenya.
A bit, but also being a grumpy old man about the bastardization of the word evolution.This, of course, ignores that colloquial English often features the usage of the word "evolution" being applied to things other than living organisms. I'm not sure if you're trying to play into the whole bit here of people talking past each other regarding language usage and how we don't all have a 100% agreement on how terms are defined/used, if you are, then well-played, if not, then... well, welcome to the party, I suppose
Language doesn't evolve, it develops. It's not a living organism. It is not trying to reproduce. It's not subject to selection pressure. Language can be altered more quickly, say, if a nation is conquered and the language of the new overlords becomes the official language of governance and business, etc. Of course, sometimes people are attached to maintaining older languages, but that's a different story.
Consider the statement: "The only factual statements are ones for which empirical evidence exists." [The philosophy of Materialism]"Metaphysical entity" trumps "god" as the mother of sloppy definitions. If entities can be shown to interact and influence decay events, that would necessarily remove them from the metaphysical realm and make them amenable to science. Until some sort of evidence is found that suggests that such entities are influencing random events, the hypothesis of their existence is unnecessary.
Newer languages are not significantly more efficient than older ones. Neither than are more 'fit' to their purpose (or survival). Linguists use the fact that there are "pressures" that exist that do create changes in language as close enough to call it evolution. But it's not really evolution. There are many factors involved in changes in language over time - evolution is only one in a more allegorical sense. Go ahead, google it, look it up - it'll be fun!Please. Ask any PhD linguist if language evolves. Go for it. Do some googling. Have fun!
Newer languages are not significantly more efficient than older ones. Neither than are more 'fit' to their purpose (or survival). Linguists use the fact that there are "pressures" that exist that do create changes in language as close enough to call it evolution. But it's not really evolution. There are many factors involved in changes in language over time - evolution is only one in a more allegorical sense. Go ahead, google it, look it up - it'll be fun!
I already know the answer because it's just part of the knowledge I have accumulated. So I just did a quick Google and it was satisfying.
Not only does language evolve as far as meanings go and new words, but also pronunciations change.
Language evolves.
I don't know why you're totally tying that completely into human evolution, although obviously those are somewhat related because some of language evolving is related to evolution from new technologies to cultural barriers being broken down, etc.
You can find the same thing as below from a lot of sources.
LSA
www.linguisticsociety.org
Is English changing?
Yes, and so is every other human language! Language is always changing, evolving, and adapting to the needs of its users.
Depends what one means by 'evolve'. The meaning of the term in biology is, I suspect, more restrictive than the non-specialist use of the word. And linguists are not specialists when it comes to the word 'evolve' as used by biologists. I mean, do computers 'evolve'? Do cars? In some ways yes, but clearly not in the way that living organisms do.
And does language adapt to the needs of its users, or do the users of language change it to fit their needs? And then that brings us back to the question of who the users of the language are, whether all those users all have the _same_ needs, and what is the distribution of power among them that determines whose needs take primacy when it comes to deciding how the language changes.
You may think a dictionary is the arbiter but they're not, oftentimes they're adapting to what is happening in society.
That's what I previously said to you! You seem to have swapped sides on that one. Earlier you were citing dictionaries as the ultimate arbiter of language!
And as for "adapting to what is happening in society", well, yes, and what is happening in society is almost always a power-struggle of some sort. You can call that 'evolution' I guess, as biological evolution involves a form of power struggle also, but you seem to be trying to argue that 'language' has some independent existence and that it changes itself somehow, rather than being the product of an ongoing conflict among the people who use it.
Close.Have you considered the existence of a teapot in orbit between the Earth and Mars?
Our universe is a simulation and dark matter is the gap resulting from a coded approximation for galactic rotations we weren't ever supposed to be able to calculate.How do you feel about dark matter?
Hey there's only a 50% chance we're a simulation (which i hope we are).Our universe is a simulation and dark matter is the gap resulting from a coded approximation for galactic rotations we weren't ever supposed to be able to calculate.
Nah. Languages evolve. Words just like biological entities are copied imperfectly. Most imperfect copies die some become successful and continue on as new words.
Great example! The rotation of galaxies should tear themselves apart. They don't. They behave as if there is more gravity holding them together than all the visible matter we can identify. The galaxies behave as if they have more "matter". This "matter" if that's what it is doesn't appear to interact with light the way regular matter does. It behaves as if it's "dark".
Dark Matter is a description of a physical effect we have identified. We have several hypothesis on what dark matter may be but until one becomes a full blown theory we'll call it dark matter.
There's a lot of 6 blind men and the elephant going on in a lot of physics. We see things and interpret them with not enough data yet. Too many mathematicians, not enough physical/mechanical physicists.I'm no sort of expert on it, but it seems to me dark matter is a little bit like the hypothesized mystery planet that was once thought to explain the anomalous orbit of mercury*.
Ultimately it turned out, of course, that the odd behavior of Mercury was due to the differences between Einsteinian dynamics and the Newtonian model. And the issue existed because the Newtonian view didn't quite match reality, rather than because there was an extra, unseen, planet between the Sun and Mercury.
Interesting that at the other end of the Solar System it worked out differently - the odd behaviour of Uranus was because there _was_ another physical body out there, i.e. Neptune. So seems that sometimes there really is another entity we haven't seen, and sometimes it's that the theory is wrong.
Likewise, perhaps Dark Matter actually exists, or perhaps it's an artifact of incomplete theories about gravity?
I don't see that "God" really fits into this either way.
* I gather it was provisionally called "Vulcan"
Vulcan (hypothetical planet) - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
But what determines which die and which become successful? The deliberate choices of humans. It's a sort of evolution but it's selective breeding rather than natural selection. And a selective breeding that is driven by political factors.
That article uses the word 'evolving' just once - and uses no other form of the word. I think it's just laziness. Or, as someone else pointed out, it has become a colloquial term. Anyway, it bugs me because evolution has a very precise scientific meaning. People wind up saying things like they have evolved into a better person; uh, no, you *learned* how to be a better person. Anyway - get off my lawnI already know the answer because it's just part of the knowledge I have accumulated. So I just did a quick Google and it was satisfying.
Not only does language evolve as far as meanings go and new words, but also pronunciations change.
Language evolves.
I don't know why you're totally tying that completely into human evolution, although obviously those are somewhat related because some of language evolving is related to evolution from new technologies to cultural barriers being broken down, etc.
You can find the same thing as below from a lot of sources.
LSA
www.linguisticsociety.org
Is English changing?
Yes, and so is every other human language! Language is always changing, evolving, and adapting to the needs of its users.
That article uses the word 'evolving' just once - and uses no other form of the word. I think it's just laziness. Or, as someone else pointed out, it has become a colloquial term. Anyway, it bugs me because evolution has a very precise scientific meaning. People wind up saying things like they have evolved into a better person; uh, no, you *learned* how to be a better person. Anyway - get off my lawn