Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2016 - 09:17am PT
|
Isn't any verbal description of physics a metaphor?
no, in lieu of the purely mathematical description (which is symbolic, an attribute that some here will claim to be "metaphorical") physicists use a precise language appropriating commonly used words to new meanings. This causes no end of confusion among those who don't know (or who ignore) these new definitions.
Language, including verbal language, can be made precise through propositional logic (which, by the way, may have an entirely physical origin), especially for the purpose of physics (but also mathematics, etc.). The mathematical considerations of propositions and propositional logic are very well explored (perhaps made famous by Hofstadter's book Gödel, Escher, Bach, which features the celebrity theorem by Gödel, showing how mathematical propositions could be made equivalent to propositions in language).
The proposition set forth in this thread recently that "everything is a metaphor" could be viewed as facetious, as no evidence is brought forth to support it...
it is certainly true that propositional statements can be made that do not have clear resolution, and that the interpretation of those statements are left ambiguous, purposefully, in order to evoke a particular thought, or feeling. But that is not to say all propositions fall under this category.
Two things of relevance to this thread: 1) language changes, and especially in science (or at least in physics, e.g. the language that we currently use to discuss Newton's physics is not the same as Newton's language, even if the words used look the same) and 2) recognizing common behavioral attributes, identified as analogous behavior, sometimes points to a significant commonality that can be used to obtain deeper physical insight, but sometimes only reveals a common way of describing the phenomenon.
On this second point we find that Hilbert's early 20th century program to rid mathematics of "proof though analogy" is an example where analogy does not result in a deeper understanding (in this case, e.g. the behavior of actual hydrodynamic systems does not lead to deeper mathematical understanding of multidimensional differential-integral systems).
The major difficulty with using the word "metaphor" is that there is an intention when creating a literary metaphor, and that intention is different then the one employing a simile. It is a device used in writing, a tool of conveyance for ideas. The way "metaphor" is used in the thread divorces it from this intention, and makes it into a description of the creation of symbols, a process for which there are no alternatives and for which the intent is quite different.
While I applaud the evolution of language, there are already many ways of describing this process, my own personal opinion is that appropriating "metaphor" to this end, without being precise about its meaning, is just lazy thinking.
Perhaps someone can provide a more precise definition of the newly expanded meaning of metaphor?
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2016 - 03:48pm PT
|
. . . the language that we currently use to discuss Newton's physics is not the same as Newton's language
Ditto for the calculus. Differentials or Derivatives and Fluxions, e.g. Newton also referred to a varying, flowing quantity as a Fluent . . . what we now call a function. Meanwhile, Leibniz established much of the notation used today, like the integral sign and his notion of an Infinitesimal. When one looks up the last item, a definition is sometimes given as "a span too short to measure" or " a number too small to measure". So, in physics when one studies phenomena below the Planck Scale, does one use infinitesimals or other aspects on non-standard analysis?
;>)
Up until the beginning of the 20th century much mathematical thought in analysis revolved about special functions, like the Bessel Function. Then, as the work in foundations progressed, many mathematicians were attracted to the idea of generalizing mathematical concepts and results, leading to abstractions of familiar, fairly simple math entities. For example, the classical Riemann integral - which had its roots in the work of Archimedes - failed in rather extreme situations. So the Lebesgue integral appeared and gave the value for "area under a curve" for the function f(x) defined on [0,1] having value one for x rational and value zero for x irrational. There was more of course, and measure theory allowed investigations to proceed where simpler techniques failed or were inapplicable.
My colleague at Trondheim and I worked independently years ago to extend the Banach contraction theorem into unexplored territory regarding analytic functions. She looked at an idea I had introduced about inner compositions, deriving theory beyond what I had done, and I looked at outer compositions, obtaining comparable results. Unfortunately, these were in a sense terminal results and few if any noticed, since they didn't really allow continued investigations other than polishing the apple. They weren't very important either. But in both investigations we first looked at examples, then generalized . . . conceptual metaphors in current language.
The following is what pops up as definitions of metaphor:
A figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable:
"“I had fallen through a trapdoor of depression,” said Mark, who was fond of theatrical metaphors"
synonyms: figure of speech, image, trope, analogy, comparison, symbol, word painting/picture
"the profusion of metaphors in her everyday speech has gotten pretty tiresome"
A thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else, especially something abstract.
"the amounts of money being lost by the company were enough to make it a metaphor for an industry that was teetering"
This is a word game, so pinning down anything exact is a wayward effort IMO.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2016 - 07:59pm PT
|
Metaphor: a figure of speech in which an implicit comparison is made between two things essentially unlike
That's what I've thought. "Conceptual metaphor" seems to attempt to illuminate the abstract by citing an example that is less abstract. The use of examples to conjecture the higher abstraction, however, is commonplace in mathematics and doesn't seem to be quite the same. So I guess I was wrong. Word play.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2016 - 09:23pm PT
|
Less metaphor, more zeugma.
“Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears.”
William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar
Histories make men wise; poets, witty; the mathematics, subtle; natural philosophy, deep; moral, grave; logic and rhetoric, able to contend.
Francis Bacon, Of Studies
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2016 - 09:01am PT
|
So, in physics when one studies phenomena below the Planck Scale, does one use infinitesimals or other aspects on non-standard analysis?
absent a quantum theory of gravity, physics at the Planck scale is a rather dicey speculation. The Planck scale itself may not have any real physical significance, being, essentially, a numerological result of dimensional analysis. It is the answer to the question: how do you build a length scale out of the Planck constant?
That question isn't motivated by any particular physical phenomenon.
Quantum gravity is important at this scale because space-time, whose structure is the dynamical result of the stress-energy tensor, would be significantly "curved" at the sub-atomic level, requiring a quantum treatment. So far the mystery of the absence of such a theory has not been solved (though there is a considerable amount of work in that direction over the last couple of decades).
I can't comment on "non-standard analysis" as I don't quite know what this means. Physicists are often working in mathematics to develop tools with which to solve physical problems. String-theory is at least a contribution to some mathematical areas, even if it eventually fails the physics program.
Quantum mechanics already poses challenges at scales smaller than the "quantum limit" set by the Planck constant. It isn't at all clear that mathematics is needed.
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2016 - 09:41am PT
|
no, in lieu of the purely mathematical description (which is symbolic, an attribute that some here will claim to be "metaphorical") physicists use a precise language appropriating commonly used words to new meanings. This causes no end of confusion among those who don't know (or who ignore) these new definitions.
While this is true, it also applies to other fields as well, since each field has its jargon and jargon is the refinement of language for the purpose of increased precision. This is certainly true in the arts, resulting in no end of confusion for the public.
It's nice to see so many coming to terms with the idea of metaphor. Now perhaps a rereading of the Bible with that in mind for the purpose of extracting/understanding its wisdom, a wisdom wrapped in an easily revealed, often perfectly diaphanous, metaphor: "In the beginning was the word...".
|
|
Psilocyborg
climber
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2016 - 01:56pm PT
|
You guys are usually 10 steps ahead of me, but DMTs post got me thinking that language itself is just a big a part of subjective VS objective realities as anything else.
A rose by any other name would smell just as sweet.
But if you called your rose bush a bed of daisey's your friends won't have a correct understanding of what you are describing.
If your friends had never experienced a rose, they would either have to have faith in your testimony, be apathetic, or call you a liar.
Infinite angles of confusion when describing complex philosophical experiences, sort of like a fractal. A language fractal. A word salad.
If a rose exists in a place that lies outside consensus reality you might get burned at the stake trying to describe it.
Meanwhile, back on the ranch, a rose by any other name would smell just as sweet.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2016 - 03:31pm PT
|
I appreciate your informative reply about infinitesimals and the Planck Scale, Ed. I wrote the question half-seriously, then looked at it and thought, well, maybe there is something there. Infinitesimals were proposed by Leibniz and in fact go back in a rough sense to Archimedes. But for quite a long time they were viewed askance as perhaps not fitting into the evolving real number system. In the mid 20th century that fear was dispelled and a consistent mathematical system developed incorporating these strange little iotas.
Hyperreal number(Wiki)
I have no clue if they might be useful in physics or other sciences. They are fun to play with but seem pretty abstract to me. On the other hand, I have heard that beginning calculus students find the concepts not unpalatable and sometimes easier to follow than epsilons and deltas.
zeugma, as compared or contrasted to
I keep learning things on this thread. Never heard of this critter. And the link you provided shows a staggeringly complex categorization of metaphors that boggles the mind. I suppose there must be a reason for the proliferation of distinctions, other than to test PhD candidates in linguistics. I bow humbly before Lakoff and colleagues.
Infinite angles of confusion when describing complex philosophical experiences, sort of like a fractal. A language fractal. A word salad
I think you might be referring to chaotic unpredictability. Fractals, in the mathematical sense, are orderly and determined by relatively simple mathematical iterations, even though the graphs are amazingly complex.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2016 - 08:14pm PT
|
a rose by any other name would smell just as sweet
How do you propose to test this hypothesis?
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2016 - 09:13pm PT
|
^^^I thought it was mentioned here as a metaphor about metaphors...
context indeed...
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2016 - 09:55pm PT
|
Sycorax is focused on literature and may not perceive a larger picture.
I thought this clip from Andy's link might have some relevance to the search for mind:
"Making the strange familiar:
Sometimes you are faced with a difficult situation that is hard to understand. A useful creative act is then to make the strange familiar, bringing the thing that is difficult to conceptualize into a domain where understanding improves, inferences may be made and creative leaps are easier.
*A scientist is investigating the way a virus behaves in attaching itself to a healthy cell. She takes the metaphor of rape and uses this to explore notions of trauma, repulsion and revenge by the attacked organism.
*An engineer is looking for a way to hold together a multi-part machine in a high-vibration environment. He takes the metaphor of shivering with cold and comes up with ideas for encasing the system in a flexible jacket.
*Einstein did 'thought experiments' and played with the idea of riding on a beam of light when developing his theory of relativity.
*There is a famous story of explorers, lost in unfamiliar mountains, who found their way out using a map -- only to find later that they were using a map of a completely different area."
|
|
yanqui
climber
Balcarce, Argentina
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 04:29am PT
|
explorers, lost in unfamiliar mountains, who find their way out using a map of a completely different area
Actually that does sound a bit like what mathematicians do from time to time.
|
|
yanqui
climber
Balcarce, Argentina
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 04:39am PT
|
On the other hand, after they've found their way out they finish up by proving unequivocally that the map they used is in fact isomorphic to a map of the previously unknown terrain, thus establishing the use was logically justified (after the fact). The proving stuff is part of the job.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 08:15am PT
|
And climbers have made first ascents doing routes that were already in a guidebook. Including me. The explanation we got from the wrongly attributed first ascent personnel was that they summited in poor weather, couldn't be sure which spire they were on, and guessed wrong.
edit:
And my mistake was to see a very good match between the features as described in the guide and what I saw on the rock. My partner, a lapsed physicist who made a career in computer science, told me as we were looking, "This is not the North Face." Meaning the route we were looking for. But it was a north face. Nevertheless, I could see a line above my partner's words, a convention indicating negation.
|
|
jogill
climber
Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 12:30pm PT
|
Very early in my climbing career my two companions and I followed guide book instructions for the OS route on the Grand Teton . . . And found ourselves on the summit of the Middle Teton.
;>)
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 01:11pm PT
|
Just think of the Middle as a metaphor for the Grand.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 08:15pm PT
|
To the next poster who drops by to make fun of us for going in circles and otherwise not getting anywhere:
Would I do it again, knowing the journey and how it ends?
Yes.
Seems a fittingly meditative reflection on coming into this world and then leaving it. Please don't come after me for copyright infringement.
And anyway, I think that Plato or Einstein or D Lama long ago solved the mind/body problem, if there was one.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 08:18pm PT
|
That would be synecdoche
Cotard was one of Philip Hoffman's more engaging roles. He left the stage too soon at age 47.
|
|
jogill
climber
Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 19, 2016 - 12:55pm PT
|
Edge of the light
Derric and Becca are rather tedious.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!