What is the Force

Loudzoo wrote: The same goes for all equations that seem to model reality accurately. If physicists ever discover, and agree on, a Grand Unified Theory - that too, will be an aspect of The Force.

Ahh, so The Force, is actually quite literally termed. Its actually just physics -

The Force(s) [of nature].

I guess we are done here, right?

double

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

Loudzoo wrote: The same goes for all equations that seem to model reality accurately. If physicists ever discover, and agree on, a Grand Unified Theory - that too, will be an aspect of The Force.

Ahh, so The Force, is actually quite literally termed. Its actually just physics -

The Force(s) [of nature].

I guess we are done here, right?

Well, if you want to take only one, scientific pov on something many view as mystical, immeasurable, and beyond understanding... Then yeah...

Arisaig wrote: Well, if you want to take only one, scientific pov on something many view as mystical, immeasurable, and beyond understanding... Then yeah...

The forces of nature are neither mystical, immeasurable nor beyond understanding. So it sounds like they do not qualify as this thing we are exploring then, right? So the only conclusion I can draw from this is that the assertion that Einsteins Field Equations are "The Force" in any POV is a false assertion, correct?

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

Arisaig wrote: Well, if you want to take only one, scientific pov on something many view as mystical, immeasurable, and beyond understanding... Then yeah...

The forces of nature are neither mystical, immeasurable nor beyond understanding. So it sounds like they do not qualify as this thing we are exploring then, right? So the only conclusion I can draw from this is that the assertion that Einsteins Field Equations are "The Force" in any POV is a false assertion, correct?

The forces of nature are measurable, within the realm of understanding fully, and are definitly not mystical or immeasurable. Correct.

The Force is not as such though...

Arisaig wrote:

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

Arisaig wrote: Well, if you want to take only one, scientific pov on something many view as mystical, immeasurable, and beyond understanding... Then yeah...

The forces of nature are neither mystical, immeasurable nor beyond understanding. So it sounds like they do not qualify as this thing we are exploring then, right? So the only conclusion I can draw from this is that the assertion that Einsteins Field Equations are "The Force" in any POV is a false assertion, correct?

The forces of nature are measurable, within the realm of understanding fully, and are definitly not mystical or immeasurable. Correct.

The Force is not as such though...

I understand the general premise that we do not know everything, and that as our technology progresses we might be able to know more about the Universe.

I do not understand, however, the dichotomy proposed of things that we can finally measure (that we once could not) being automatically assumed to be "outside" of the category the "mystical, immeasurable, and beyond understanding" quality proposed for the Force. Does this means that two centuries ago the Internet or space travel would qualify as "of The Force" and now they do not? Wouldn't that simply mean "The Force" is a vague label for anything we do not yet understand?

Manu wrote:

Arisaig wrote:

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

Arisaig wrote: Well, if you want to take only one, scientific pov on something many view as mystical, immeasurable, and beyond understanding... Then yeah...

The forces of nature are neither mystical, immeasurable nor beyond understanding. So it sounds like they do not qualify as this thing we are exploring then, right? So the only conclusion I can draw from this is that the assertion that Einsteins Field Equations are "The Force" in any POV is a false assertion, correct?

The forces of nature are measurable, within the realm of understanding fully, and are definitly not mystical or immeasurable. Correct.

The Force is not as such though...

I understand the general premise that we do not know everything, and that as our technology progresses we might be able to know more about the Universe.

I do not understand, however, the dichotomy proposed of things that we can finally measure (that we once could not) being automatically assumed to be "outside" of the category the "mystical, immeasurable, and beyond understanding" quality proposed for the Force. Does this means that two centuries ago the Internet or space travel would qualify as "of The Force" and now they do not? Wouldn't that simply mean "The Force" is a vague label for anything we do not yet understand?

Well, no. The Force is and always be immeasurable, impossible to truly understand. It's not the Force because we don't understand it. We can feel it. Experience it. But we cannot grasp, control, mesure, or hope to do any of those things.

It's not like we'll ever figure out to. The internet was always possible. It just took the right minds and tech to make it a reality. The Force is more premordial than that. It simply is. That is about as deep an understanding a layman of the path will arrive to.

Loudzoo wrote: Einstein's field equations form part of General Relativity - they represent that which literally holds the universe together: gravity! Without gravity there is no life and such equations do grant us tremendous insight into the nature of the universe, and therefore us: we are part of the Universe! To understand the Universe is to understand ourselves in a fundamental way.

Sure, but without going through all these steps - GTR, gravity, holding-the-universe-together, nature-of-the-universe (?), us, the Force - one wouldn't see how they are connected. Were you just refer to "the Force", so my argument goes, nobody would think of general relativity, neither immediately nor after a while, unless they were directed down that lengthy thought path. If one wanted to speak of the field equations, the Force is anything but a sensible starting point, is my point.
This is even assuming that that train of thought is smooth itself.
I for one disagree that "holding the universe together" is a meaningful expression in a scientific context, and to adorn gravity with such power takes a fair measure of poetic liberty. One can surely say such things and mean something either trivial or false by it, but not anything one wouldn't have to explain afterwards anyway.
While life like us surely developed in a gravity well, the chemistry that actually makes it run is rooted pretty much entirely in electromagnetism and would be effectively no different if there was no gravity at all. I'm not a biologist, for what it's worth, still, that life in general - or indeed life as we know it - couldn't evolve without gravity is in my opinion a rather bold claim I would first wish to see some argumentation for before accepting.

These are still field equations - but whatever they ultimately represent, is still part of The Force.

They represent our understanding of relativity. They are expressions compatible with observations we have made in the past and predictive of observations we may make in future to within known and finite margins of error. We can embellish that with interpretations, try and think of them as statements about what they "ultimately" represent, of course. I do not find that designing those interpretations is a part of the scientific process, nor is what comes of it a part of the model. Whether they are desirable I am comfortable to leave to the individual person and their sensibilities on such matters, but science they are not in either case.

Arisaig wrote: The Force is and always be [sic] immeasurable, impossible to truly understand. It's not the Force because we don't understand it. We can feel it. Experience it. But we cannot grasp, control, mesure, or hope to do any of those things.

How is this not a contradiction? If we can never hope to detect/measure it because that just "is not as such though", if it is immeasurable in principle, then that literally means that it does not interact with anything. We are not magic-detectors. We are made of flesh and blood, of things that work as they do because they cannot help but to work in these ways. Ways we have on a very fundamental level a very good grasp of, a better grasp in fact, than we have of anything else, including more remote, macroscopic levels of those same things. If we can feel a thing, really feel it, above and beyond pretending to ourselves that we do, that itself implies that there is a way to measure it. And if we cannot ever hope to measure a thing, then for that reason we cannot ever hope to feel it either. You can't have it both ways. If what ever part of it exists only outside of reality, then that part literally does not exist in reality.

It's not like we'll ever figure out to. The internet was always possible. It just took the right minds and tech to make it a reality. The Force is more premordial [sic] than that. It simply is. That is about as deep an understanding a layman of the path will arrive to. [sic]

Do you want me to tell you how I feel when people say that I'm being presumtuous for asserting that some things are not possible, thinking that my only argument is that we haven't figured it out yet? You have figured it all out, it seems, and for a lay person, so you say, there is no place left to move. Your message is the most wisdom to be absorbed on this matter. So how did you surpass that, then? What do you know that makes you a non-lay man and how did you get to know that? And if you are a lay man still, then are you not saying that nevertheless you have figured out as much as anyone can hope to? Say, where else is there to go? How is this not about as rigid and closed-minded a position as is possible to hold?
Now I'm not one to say you're wrong about it, there is after all no basis on which I could. Yet, what inquiry can I possibly raise at you when there is nothing left for you to ponder? What conversation can we still have about this at all, if one of us has already said all there is to say? What argument can someone give for their position, if no argument can possibly have had them arrive at it?

Arisaig wrote:
The Force is and always be immeasurable,
impossible to truly understand.
We can feel it. Experience it. But we cannot grasp, control, mesure, or hope to do any of those things.

It's not like we'll ever figure out to.

The Force is more premordial...
It simply is.

Arent these attributes you assign to it just a description of the Human Condition? That definition of the Human Condition as being a blanket term used in the context of ambiguous subjects such as the meaning of life in birth, growth, death, emotionality, aspirations, conflict and moral concerns.