Math describes the universe. Math is extremely deterministic.

Bob describes the universe. Bob is extremely gay. Therefore the universe is extremely gay.

>>1465313
>Math is extremely deterministic.
No.

>>1465313
>Math describes the universe.
No.

So you never graduated from middle school level math?

>>1465313
Math describes the universe because we chose to do that with math and look what has happened with the people who ran with this idea just a bit too much. They established theories and confirmed them with really narrow examples they call experiments and then when the scope of their theory expanded they realized that their math was not correct but they had gone so far that instead of going back to the beginning accepted defeat they invented some sort of dark energy that simply explains why gravity is not worked like they predicted. That is absolutely bullshit.

Math has failed to explain the universe and the shitty mathematicians we call physicists have really, really fucked it up. They are already so desperate they are using probabilistic models because fixing their previous deterministic models would mean starting from scratch and going back 300 years ago in terms of the science they can accept.

>>1465367
>fixing their previous deterministic models would mean starting from scratch and going back 300 years ago in terms of the science they can accept.
What do you mean by this? Mechanics has been reworked from scratch multiple times within the last 200 years. Hamiltonian mechanics and general relativity are two examples of this.

>>1465394
That it is all bullshit. According to general relativity the expansion of the universe should be deccelerating but it is accelerating.

Therefore the """must""" be some kind of dark energy that we need to account for in our equations.

That is bullshit, physicists simply gave up in remaking their models. As you say, this is probably because they've had to do it many times now and they are just tired of throwing hundreds of years out of window.

Physics will never be able to answer the fundamental question of the universe being deterministic because at this point physics can only describe a really shitty portrait of the universe, and not the universe itself.

In a couple of years some experimental guy will find new results that can't even explained with dark energy and then theoretical physicists will come up with light dark energy, a force that reduces the force of dark energy in certain circumstances.

Then new experimental results will come and to adjust we will need to add a new variable, dark light dark energy.

And so on.

We've lost, physics was a mistake.

>>1465489
>Physics will never be able to answer the fundamental question of the universe
why does it matter what the question is when we already know the answer is 42?

>>1465489
That physicists aren't completely sure about every fact pertaining to cosmology really has no bearing on that they have entirely overhauled their underlying mathematical assumptions many times (sometimes rendering identical results). Physics went through a particularly extreme mathematical reworking in the mid 20th century as the theory of Riemannian manifolds was getting rigorized. I'm not really sure what you're soapboxing about, but you don't seen very knowledgeable about this topic.

>>1465489
We haven't lost anything. As our instruments and methods of observations become more finely tuned and sophisticated, we will continually revise our understanding of the universe. We realize what truly was a guess for lack of the unknown unknown, and what we had that works.

I mean shit dude, gravitational waves were proven to exist a few months ago, and it was only done through patience, and incredibly precise instruments.

Your whole post reeks of the projections of an impatient and intellectually lazy christfag.