|
awrigley
|
|
|
|
Quote: sulcus...String theory may have a whole load of equations backing it up, but scientists also feel the need to explain it in words and with metaphors such as string, because the stand alone maths is too abstruse to anyone but their own cabal (mirroring the relationship between certain visual art & the written text in some ways)... Nope. Not wanting to get into nit picking with someone who can remove the hind legs of dogs, donkeys, cyborgs and yetis with a flood of words, I will make one point and then get back to work: Words are what physicists use when they are obliged to divulge what they do to lay people. In their own company, they trade equations, not words, to convey their thinking. Put another way: the words are meaningless, and valueless, if they are not backed up by the equations. The aesthetics are entirely in the equations and how they were deduced. It has nothing to do with metaphors. Scientists will use what might be called labels: spin, colour flavour... Einstein's objection to Quantum Mechanics proves the above: God does not play dice. This is a metaphor and a statement of aesthetics that is not backed up by the facts, as expressed in equations. Einstein, by basing himself on metaphors and personal beliefs, was wrong. Doubly so. Another example, by believing that the Universe was static, Einstein changed his theory, added the Cosmological Constant to the equations of General Relativity and thereby deprived himself of the greatest scientific glory ever: The prediction that the Universe is not static. Ie, it expands or contracts. I rest my case, have a good weekend. Andrew
Memory... What was that?
|
|
sulcus
|
|
|
|
Quote: awrigley, Friday, 12 Feb 2010 18:29Quote: sulcus...String theory may have a whole load of equations backing it up, but scientists also feel the need to explain it in words and with metaphors such as string, because the stand alone maths is too abstruse to anyone but their own cabal (mirroring the relationship between certain visual art & the written text in some ways)... Nope. Not wanting to get into nit picking with someone who can remove the hind legs of dogs, donkeys, cyborgs and yetis with a flood of words, I will make one point and then get back to work: Words are what physicists use when they are obliged to divulge what they do to lay people. In their own company, they trade equations, not words, to convey their thinking. Put another way: the words are meaningless, and valueless, if they are not backed up by the equations. The aesthetics are entirely in the equations and how they were deduced. It has nothing to do with metaphors. Scientists will use what might be called labels: spin, colour flavour... Einstein's objection to Quantum Mechanics proves the above: God does not play dice. This is a metaphor and a statement of aesthetics that is not backed up by the facts, as expressed in equations. Einstein, by basing himself on metaphors and personal beliefs, was wrong. Doubly so. Another example, by believing that the Universe was static, Einstein changed his theory, added the Cosmological Constant to the equations of General Relativity and thereby deprived himself of the greatest scientific glory ever: The prediction that the Universe is not static. Ie, it expands or contracts. I rest my case, have a good weekend. Andrew You too Andrew. I concede you know far more about physics than I do, but I will not yield my superstitional belief in science only being another set of metaphors, ones couched in equations within a bounded system called maths. They are only facts within the hermetically sealed inner logic that guides maths. Whether such logic mimics/mirrors an inner pattern or harmony or arrangement does not forge it as fact or essential truth. I am with Einstein, Luddite that I am, his theories border on a non-theocratic numinosity.
"A,B&E", "Not In My Name" and "52FF" (flash fiction anthology) all available on Amazon Kindle"How a psychopath makes sweet love. I can get you ringside. Royal box even."
|
|
awrigley
|
|
|
|
Quote: sulcus, Friday, 12 Feb 2010 19:59I am with Einstein, Luddite that I am, his theories border on a non-theocratic numinosity. I guess that is one way, within the context of our discussion, of admiting that you are wrong. Einstein was wrong for the very reasons that you espouse. The difference, I suppose, is that he was the first one to admit it. I quote: "The Cosmological Constant was the biggest error of my life"
Albert EinsteinOff to London for a wedding, bye. Andrew
This post was last edited by awrigley, 12 Feb 2010, 20:34
Memory... What was that?
|
|
sulcus
|
|
|
|
Quote: awrigley, Friday, 12 Feb 2010 20:34Quote: sulcus, Friday, 12 Feb 2010 19:59I am with Einstein, Luddite that I am, his theories border on a non-theocratic numinosity. I guess that is one way, within the context of our discussion, of admiting that you are wrong. Einstein was wrong for the very reasons that you espouse. The difference, I suppose, is that he was the first one to admit it. I quote: "The Cosmological Constant was the biggest error of my life"
Albert EinsteinOff to London for a wedding, bye. Andrew I happen to believe, in a primitive sort of way, that there is no reason for the speed of light to be a constant either
"A,B&E", "Not In My Name" and "52FF" (flash fiction anthology) all available on Amazon Kindle"How a psychopath makes sweet love. I can get you ringside. Royal box even."
|
|
awrigley
|
|
|
|
sulcus You are either with Einstein or without him. And the overwhelming reality is that the speed of light is constant in all frames of reference. To believe anything else is the last flicker, the last ditch stand of humanity's delusion that we are somehow relevant in some uncertain but cosmological way. But hey, why not be a writer rather than a physicist? Long live the primitive soul that dwells within us all. Denied by some, enthroned by others, it is, like everything else, but a figment of our imaginings. Andrew
This post was last edited by awrigley, 12 Feb 2010, 21:17
Memory... What was that?
|
|
awrigley
|
|
|
|
As to assisted suicide, what is all the fuss about? There are trains, cliffs, sleeping pills, pet snakes, lorries, motorway bridges... All of which will kill you if used correctly. But then the problem isn't the how but the when. The problem being that when you are ready to die, it is too late to jump off bridges, step in front of speeding trains, leap off cliffs. Ie, the problem is not knowing when enough is enough. Which is something that can't be legislated. My mother came over to England two years ago. She hadn't spoken to her brother for 35 years. But with him dying of prostate cancer, I negotiated a settlement and took full responsibility for there being no fights. It worked. Whilst in England, she also went to see an old friend who got polio after being married and having two sons. She was in a home in Hastings, up on the mount, the area surrounded by cliffs. She decided to stay there for two or three days, so I left her to it. On day two, she decided to take her friend for a spin in the wheel chair. My mother is persuasive and the nurses eventually conceded. On one condition. Do NOT, under any circumstances, take the path along the edge of the cliff. Well, you do NOT say do NOT to my mother. So off they went, clapped out ol' mrs wrigley pushing the wheel chair. Only pretty soon it was desperate ol' mrs wrigley clinging onto the wheel chair for her dear friend's life. No, of course the wheel chair didn't take the back door out of hell on earth (having polio in a home in Hastings). Otherwise, it would have been in the news: "Mad Argie murders disabled mother of two" It was, however, a close run thing. So, if anyone is contemplating assisted suicide when they are way past doing it for themselves, check yourself into the home on the hill in Hastings and I will have a word with my mother. It's called a flying exit. Andrew
This post was last edited by awrigley, 12 Feb 2010, 21:40
Memory... What was that?
|
|
Carole
|
|
|
|
Alternatively, hang around YWO for a couple of months until completely moribund, OR, Ingest ant powder.
*
|
|
sulcus
|
|
|
|
Quote: awrigley, Friday, 12 Feb 2010 21:17sulcus To believe anything else is the last flicker, the last ditch stand of humanity's delusion that we are somehow relevant in some uncertain but cosmological way. Andrew I had hoped my references to the cosmic joke of human existence might have disabused you of the above.
"A,B&E", "Not In My Name" and "52FF" (flash fiction anthology) all available on Amazon Kindle"How a psychopath makes sweet love. I can get you ringside. Royal box even."
|
|
awrigley
|
|
|
|
Quote: Carole, Friday, 12 Feb 2010 22:21Alternatively, hang around YWO for a couple of months until completely moribund, OR, Ingest ant powder. Or rat poison. Mind you, doesn't do me any harm. Keeps me alive in fact.
Memory... What was that?
|
|
AntCity
|
|
|
|
A thousand years ago the priests and monks knew that the Earth was the centre of the universe, that Jerusalem was the centre of a flat Earth and that the whole lot was made in six days by God. Is it possible that in another thousand years quantum scientists will seem just as archaic? Now, I need to sit down.
|
|