Re: MD Provisonal or Absolute Truth?

From: ian glendinning (psybertron@gmail.com)
Date: Wed Sep 07 2005 - 19:09:26 BST

  • Next message: ian glendinning: "Re: MD Provisonal or Absolute Truth?"

    Sorry to labour the point Gav,

    Everything scales (above or below) "by analogy" yes, but not
    necessarily with any meaningful quality of explanation. There are high
    and low quality analogies. (For example as Pirsig points out in ZMM
    quantum physics is not much use explaining how a motorbike works,
    despite the fact it could be said to consist of quanta.)

    Bearing in mind however, that I consider information (data) to be the
    most fundamental level of nature (physics / natural science)
    conceivable - as does Pirsig incidentally -

    Lila Ch8 (P103 Hardback / P120 Paperback)
    [Quote] The next platypus to fall is "substance." Like "causation,"
    "substance" is a derived concept, not anything that is directly
    experienced. No one has ever seen substance and no one ever will. All
    people ever see is data. It is assumed that what makes the data hang
    together in consistent patterns is that they inhere in this
    "substance." [Unquote]

    I did also see a complementarity / conjugate-variable argument a
    couple of years ago from Seth Russell, that suggested that the
    Syntactical Definition of a fact and its Semantic Richness were
    conjugates - the more precisely you state its definition, the less
    sure you are about understanding it.
    http://www.psybertron.org/?p=338

    I think I already said I agree with you about "knowledge" in this
    respect - the more you focus, the less you really know. Not sure what
    Bohr would make of it, but Szillard and Bronowski would agree ?

    Ian

    On 9/7/05, gav <gav_gc@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
    > cheers ian,
    >
    > everything is an analogy
    >
    > everything scales,
    >
    > as above, so below
    >
    > i reckon quantum theory, like complementarity is of
    > broader application than just the most micro scales. i
    > reckon bohr would agree eh?
    >
    >
    >
    > --- ian glendinning <psybertron@gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > > Gav,
    > >
    > > Bearing in mind that we're talking in analogies here
    > > ... Heisenberg
    > > doesn't really apply above quantum scale
    > > complementary variables, as
    > > you know .... I see it your way too.
    > >
    > > In general, the more we focus on some precise
    > > "atomic" fact the less
    > > we see (know) the holistic reality. (We con
    > > ourselves into believing
    > > some simple causal determinism between the atomic
    > > facts and the
    > > holistic outcomes, when, outside the science lab,
    > > there rarely is.)
    > >
    > > Ian
    > >
    > > On 9/7/05, gav <gav_gc@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
    > > > maybe the uncertainty principle explains what you
    > > guys
    > > > are talking about:
    > > >
    > > > firstly is this a fair take of the principle?:
    > > > the more you know about an electron's position the
    > > > less you know about its momentum; and the more you
    > > > know about its momentum the less you know about
    > > its
    > > > position.
    > > >
    > > > if so then the more specific a truth statement the
    > > > more provisional it is, ie the more you pinpoint
    > > the
    > > > truth the less you know about how that truth is
    > > > evolving, moving, going (its momentum);
    > > > conversely the more general a truth statement the
    > > > less provisional but also the more vague.
    > > >
    > > > we are limited in how far we can zoom in on
    > > > *particular truths* because to zoom in means to
    > > lose
    > > > knowledge of that truth's relation to its
    > > environment,
    > > > ie we lose knowledge of its context, direction.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > ____________________________________________________
    > > > Do you Yahoo!?
    > > > The New Yahoo! Movies: Check out the Latest
    > > Trailers, Premiere Photos and full Actor Database.
    > > > http://au.movies.yahoo.com
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    > > > Mail Archives:
    > > > Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    > > http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    > > > Nov '02 Onward -
    > >
    > http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    > > > MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
    > > >
    > > > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the
    > > instructions at:
    > > > http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
    > > >
    > > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    > > Mail Archives:
    > > Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    > > http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    > > Nov '02 Onward -
    > >
    > http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    > > MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
    > >
    > > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the
    > > instructions at:
    > > http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
    > >
    > >
    >
    >
    > Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
    >
    >
    > MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    > Mail Archives:
    > Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    > Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    > MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
    >
    > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    > http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
    >
    >

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 07 2005 - 19:45:00 BST