RE: Proving What We Already "Know"
June 20, 2022 at 7:32 pm
(This post was last modified: June 20, 2022 at 7:33 pm by HappySkeptic.)
(June 20, 2022 at 5:54 pm)bennyboy Wrote: My response to solid-and-empty tables is to establish a context, and to accept a truth-in-context. In the context of modern physics, it's true that a table is mostly empty. In the context of placing my breakfast on it it's true that it's solid. The problem is that in establishing a context, a local truth cannot be generalized to Truth™, unless you have some mechanism or method of bridging two (or all) contexts. I do not currently know of a way to bridge a modern scientific understanding of the world with my actual daily experience of it.
Things "are" as they "act".
A table is solid to most things. It is partly see-through to X-rays, and almost completely transparent to neutrinos. That "empty space" is filled with electron clouds that experience repulsive and attractive forces. That isn't empty.
What we perceive with one sense or with one type of test isn't all of reality. It is exciting that physics can drill down into the nature of things at different sizes and levels of interactions. Every one of them are "real" in the context they are explored.
