你連乜野係科學、乜野唔係科學、係科學嘅條件係乜都搞唔清,吹咩reductionism 有問題?
我從來冇講過咩"所有東西都可以約化最終到物理學"。係你喺度懶醒打稻草人咋喎。 我嘅意思唔係佢優於其他學科。我嘅意思係指出,佢處理自然科學中最基本嘅部分,並且佢唔建基於其他學科之上
reduce乜reduce物,都係自然科學範疇裡面咋喎。 不懂正確閱讀也不重要
最重要的係Ask for clarification,而唔係懶醒咁「打稻草人」。 ...
Guest from 203.145.89.x 發表於 2024/7/25 08:20 ![](https://exchristian.hk/forum/images/common/back.gif)
呢度探討科學的目的,是為咗探討宗教。
Guest from 124.244.37.x 發表於 2024/7/21 20:14 ![](https://exchristian.hk/forum/images/common/back.gif)
似乎係你以為有啲野可以reduce落科學度,多過我咁諗喎。
reductionism係得㗎,睇咩scope之嘛,化學係完全可以reduce落物理度;所有電腦問題可以reduce落0同1度,如我所言。
Gemini AI: Can Chemistry Be Reduced to Physics?
In principle, yes. Chemistry is fundamentally about the behavior of matter and energy, which are also the domain of physics. Therefore, it's logical to assume that all chemical processes can be explained by underlying physical laws.
In practice, it's incredibly complex.
唔好成日話乜人地唔識問問題,只不過係我問問題出黎果啲答案唔係你想要果啲啫,我就係識問先問到乜野資料可以俾你知道自己唔一定係啱果個。我話你知,啲醫生同我講,通常病人問佢地野,問唔到想要嘅答案,就會改用其他方式問多次,直到佢地聽到想聽嘅答案為止。呢啲就係做人耐左先有嘅智慧。 |