Warp wrote:
> clipka <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>> Then again, I could turn my speculation indeed into an objection: As of now, no
>> singularity (i.e. a condition where a formula gives "infinity" as an answer)
>> predicted by any scientific theory has ever been observed in true life.
> 
>   Lack of evidence is not evidence of the contrary. 

If course it is.  It's not *proof*, but it's certainly evidence.

Do you go to the doctor to check if you have the flu, even if you have no 
symptoms? No, because lack of evidence is evidence to the contrary. :-)

> 1) Assume that GR equations are correct in all situations, including
>    the extreme ones. There's little evidence to show that this wouldn't
>    be so. One consequence of this is accepting singularities, at least
>    until better evidence shows up.

That would assume that QM is broken, and there's little evidence to show 
*that* would be so. :-)

> 2) Object to the notion of a singularity to be possible. This implies that
>    GR equations do *not* work in all possible situations, and that they
>    start to deviate in extreme conditions. However, no concrete evidence
>    of this exists,

Except fermions.

I don't think anyone on p.o-t knows whether GR or QM is wrong for sure.

But it has been fun talking about it, because I think I understand better 
what the problem is.

> long as viable theories

... which is where we came into the thread. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Ouch ouch ouch!"
   "What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
   "No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."

Post a reply to this message