Moronium Posted June 12, 2018 Report Share Posted June 12, 2018 (edited) If one reads the rest of the Eddington's publication referenced above, it makes it quite clear that he was well aware of the vast number of unexamined assumptions embedded in any world view and understood the critical issue standing behind the underlying problem. After considerable thought, he defended placing the problem into philosophy and outside the interest of physical scientists. As Eddington saw the issue, the development of those signs and indications are the necessary opening assumptions and simply can not be avoided. He thus defends the professional scientists avoidance of the issue as the only rational approach. Roughly 50 years ago I saw a route around that issue and have since tried to communicate my thoughts with utter and complete failure to date. Maybe Eddington also realized that a mathematician is not a "physical scientist." As I've said elsewhere with regard to special relativity, Minkowski should have stuck to math, and Einstein should have stuck to physics Edited June 12, 2018 by Moronium Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.