Neil DeGrasse Tyson headed down same loony road as Carl Sagan?
On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 08:38:41 +0200, Paul Schlyter
wrote:
On Tue, 09 Oct 2018 07:46:14 -0600, Chris L Peterson
wrote:
On Tue, 09 Oct 2018 15:21:57 +0200, Paul Schlyter
wrote:
Why? That's a fallacy. GR is easy to understand. QM is easy to
understand. That doesn't make either of them obvious. We can
puzzle
for a long time over a tricky problem that ends up having an
extremely
simple and easy to understand solution. Simple != obvious.
Here you contradict yourself by saying:
1. QM and GR are both simple..
2. Simple is obvious.
3. However, QM and GR are not necessarily obvious.
Where did I say that simple is obvious? I said that simple does not
imply obvious.
OK, I misread your != as a =
However, simple != obvious is also in error because it implies that
anything which is obvious also must be complex. That is not the case.
I think my meaning was pretty clear, that "simple" and "obvious" are
not synonyms. Sure, there are simple things which ARE obvious. But
nothing requires that things which are simple are also obvious. The
reason it has taken us thousands of years to figure out most of nature
is precisely because all those simple rules are not obvious.
|