That would be fine if you or science knew the answers about the dark stuff but they dont and until they do my musing is just as relevant as mathematical measurements. Flights of fancy have created more understanding of our universe than any methodical measuring. Was the idea of black holes imagined or measured. It needed a flight of fancy to recognise the inaccuracies in measurements. No amount of measuring will tell you how the BB became evident...I appreciate science but I dont worship it.
Yeah, but you have to understand that there is a very well tested framework within which you need to view dark matter and dark energy before you can fully understand what they are mathematically
, which is the most important aspect of their definition in terms of being able to accurately speculate on reasonable extensions and consequences of the theory. Otherwise it's just shooting the breeze about what you think the universe might be like; it's like feeling around in a dark room when there are guys with flashlights looking around, they've already figured out a big part of what certainly doesn't work, but seems like it would. Without standing on the shoulders of giants, you're just playing around in the same sandbox that has already been played in and discarded for a nicer, larger sandbox.
Stephen Hawking knew the current mathematical model before he could do any of his work
; otherwise he would have wasted his time taking potshots in the dark, hoping to get lucky. The truth of the matter is this; you have to understand what the question is, where is came from, what the context of it is in the greater scheme of things etc. etc. etc. There is no way around it, you have to put in the hard work if you want to do anything outside of fun, albeit pointless, speculation.
It is fun to speculate about things that we know little about, myself included, but it is simply self delusion
to think that any layman
and get a good solution to a standing problem without fully understanding the context of the question
. Only a well trained scientist, or a person like Einstein who really devoted himself to learning the subjects
and the mathematics, can proceed in a reasonable fashion. The layman who does not put in the hundreds or thousands of hours of hard work may have fun, but he will get no results. That is my only point.
So no, it is not good to worship science
, but it is good to have a healthy outlook about what is reasonable
and what is not in terms of how these things are discovered. Flights of fancy can get us going in the right direction
, but the simple truth of the matter is; taken alone they make up the vastly small minority of the total work done by science
and scientists. Newton was not great because he had many flights of fancy; he was great because he had the discipline and love of his subject to really meticulously test and work out those kernels of his intuition into a mathematical framework on top of having much inspiration and natural ability.
So no, your musings, my musings, are both somewhat irrelevant by virtue of the fact that neither of us fully understand the questions we seek to answer; we haven't put in the requisite work to do so. Now, our musings might help US
gain a little bit more consistency
in what we believe
to be true; if there are any stark problems with consistency we can help each other by pointing such things out. It helps no one if I see fire and claim that it is the essence of wood to contain fire, when we have a working model of combustion. It is nonsense to think that I might have a good idea outside of blind luck striking me. I wouldn't be able to recognize a good idea if I had one because I would be unfamiliar with the context.
These threads are not even philosophy of science, they are idle speculation, and should be declared as such. I would say that if you have a question about physics, go to physicsforums.com or a similar forum in the psuedo-science and debunking area and see if your ideas hold any water after a trained scientist or hardcore enthusiast looks at them and discusses them with you.