@MerlinCrow I disagree with you Sir and here is why:
1. ---> Even if you "project an observation of a complex system where your statement might apply", that doesn't mean that the conclusions of such projection are erroneous. In fact, there is more evidence to the contrary.
2. ---> Mixing rules of complex systems and applying terms like pleasure to forces and laws" is very useful when trying to assign meaning to random data, thus transforming it into meaningful information you can act upon. It is a phisical phenomenon that teaches the "young scientist" not to touch the stove. Even inferring that the "rules of complex systems" cannot work in other "less complex systems" is a fallacy, since you can always fabricate a less complex system while maintaining at least 1 rule from it's parent (more complex system). In fact, it can be proven that the more complex a system is --> the more rules it has. Therefore, the probability that more of those rules can be applied to infinitely "less complex systems" grows infinitely big.
3. ---> "Projecting your complex human experience onto the shallow comprehension of the physics at this moment" ---> is actually the ONLY fundamental way of how humans "uncovered" every "Fundamental Law" we know so far. Newton did it at "his moment", Einstein did it at "his moment", Maxwell, Faraday and so on. It is precisely that through projecting our human complex experience that we transgressed our physical limitations.
4. ---> As for POLITICS, I would argue that it's crucial in helping or hindering our efforts in working with Fundamental Laws and carving a better future.
5. --- > As for monetization and money, I wouldn't lose any precious time in commenting a non-issue which I consider trivial. I'm grateful I am able to exchange ideas in good-faith with people of different backgrounds 😛 I foresee a great expansion of this Community under mr Pagburn ^_^ It's useful for me especially because i can improve my rudimentary English...
