Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Jul 17, 2015 - 07:38am PT
|
Ward, if you haven't already, have a look at Connections, by James Burke. Connections 1 and/or Connections 2. They are chockfull of parallelisms, metaphors, correspondences, and last but not least, connections, across time and fields and processes - you'll be happy to see - all correctly and insightfully employed.
The good news, they are all now available on Youtube. This is amazing, btw!
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=connections+james+burke+season+1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAGMNVluHs4&list=PL-teo99ENSypJDyeXmEpLOxWMB9UVPbOS
On a personal note: These documentary series were crucial to this "mildly tragic" figure's (early adult) formative years in regards to relations, or relationship, between causation, mechanism, cosmos and chaos, and history.
Well worth a look-see if not in-depth study.
PS How cool is this. Go to any of Burke's individual episodes at youtube, check out the likes vs dislikes (thumbs up vs thumbs down). It's a huge ratio (all the more outstanding if you're already familiar with these ratios) - so what's cool to see is that there are umpteen millions out there apart from just me with a super great admiration for James Burke and his creative, investigative journalistic works.
I venture to say his Connections programs might be second, third or fourth to only Sagan's Cosmos, Bronowski's Ascent, and a couple of Attenborough's works.
This is youtube at its finest.
.....
Interesting discussion re Connections I (1978) at reddit...
http://www.reddit.com/r/Documentaries/comments/2sxfqe/james_burke_connections_1978_120_episodes/
"It's about how important advances in science, tech, and culture interconnect to enable, support, or inform each other. For example he traces the cotton loom to the first computer with compelling evidence. The series is also rife with humorous anecdotes of the quirks of the scientists and inventors involved."
Anyone who is a serious passionate student-scholar in the Study of Cultural Evolution and/or Civilization would do himself a "solid" to check out these Burke documentaries.
.....
Sycorax is Sullly?
OMG!!
Sullly!!!1
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Jul 17, 2015 - 08:10am PT
|
"The Connections series is fantastic. .. Really demonstrates that human history is a combination of serendipity, living at the right moment, and pure luck. That the brightest minds can smash their brains on a problem for their whole lives, and one dummy breaks a thermometer in a vat and the world changes." -reddit user
Alright, I've jumped the shark now.
.....
Sycorax...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sycorax
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Jul 17, 2015 - 08:40am PT
|
So in a certain sense it does have a volume, but not in the way we're used to thinking about it - that Largo is over there, occupying space.
This is funny given Largo's false front physics. JL is a talented entertainer. But he also is right to challenge our usual way of thinking. There are many things we become so used to seeing that we need to think for a moment to realize how strange they are.
The tiny photon whips through space at the Universe's speed limit but curls around changing density.
Water undergoes a startling change with temperature. What happened? Why did it happen at that temperature?
It takes a lot of thinking and observing to understand the ordinary. There is nothing bad about simply looking, either, and taking or leaving as each person sees fit.
|
|
Ward Trotter
Trad climber
|
|
|
Jul 17, 2015 - 09:54am PT
|
Ward, if you haven't already, have a look at Connections, by James Burke.
My large paperback edition ,front and back. Picked it up at an outdoor book sale a few years ago for $2
The book is full of these beautiful illustrations:
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Jul 17, 2015 - 11:50am PT
|
Largo's physics . . . . needs a Wiki page.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 17, 2015 - 11:53am PT
|
Dingus, you are a gem.
What in the world is "naval gazing?"
Something is not nothing. Whoever said such a thing?
And MH2, kindly provide a tangible example of me proposing "false front physics" and I'll contact the scientist you told me as much and have them respond. But be specific.
JL
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jul 17, 2015 - 11:53am PT
|
The only reliable knowledge the modern gross materialists ultimately have is ....
"We have no clue"
But in the future "We may have a clue because we'll just keep guessing all while chanting "Woo Woo Woo"!"
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Jul 17, 2015 - 12:14pm PT
|
Oh that's great to see, Ward!
That means we have some common ground between us then!
I thought this pretty cool, tweeted by @SciencePorn this morning...
Proportion is everything. Pluto to the right of Neptune.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Jul 17, 2015 - 01:44pm PT
|
MH2, kindly provide a tangible example of me proposing "false front physics"
false front: a facade extending beyond and especially above the true dimensions of a person's knowledge of physics to give it a more imposing appearance
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Jul 17, 2015 - 04:10pm PT
|
false front: a facade extending beyond and especially above the true dimensions of a person's knowledge of physics to give it a more imposing appearance (MH2)
It helps to throw in Hilbert spaces and fields without a working knowledge of what they are. Category theory and complexity theory are also recommended.
;>)
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 17, 2015 - 07:56pm PT
|
MH2, kindly provide a tangible example of me proposing "false front physics"
false front: a facade extending beyond and especially above the true dimensions of a person's knowledge of physics to give it a more imposing appearance
-
Again, Mh2, it would be something to address the question: Specifically, where is the physics I quoted incorrect? I wil have one of my friends respond directly to whatever question you have, if in fact you have a question.
And John, you know perfectly well that my use of "Hilbert Space" was never an attempt to appropriate an actual model cribbed from physics, but rather I was suggesting that in the investigation of mind, perhaps we should use a provisional system or protocol or evaluation strategy to work with a slippery subject. The Hilbert Space of physics would be of no value here - quantifying only pertains to objective functioning, as Chalmers has clearly pointed out. But we do need a common language and terms and definitions that, while they might not be objective correlates to mind, they might provide a starting point to cover some little ground.
What's more, all the talk about resolving to zero and no rest mass and no thing and a phenomenon with no dimensionality all underscore that the materials dream, that all things reduce down to some tangible physical stuff, is a belief that rests on quicksand. Definitions of mass and mater are themselves equivocal. Consider this quote:
Typically, science considers these composite particles matter because they have both rest mass and volume. By contrast, massless particles, such as photons, are not considered matter, because they have neither rest mass nor volume. However, not all particles with rest mass have a classical volume, since fundamental particles such as quarks and leptons (sometimes equated with matter) are considered "point particles" with no effective size or volume.
If the very building blocks of the physical world have no effective size or volume, what exactly is a materialist hoping to hang on to? Matter - the Golden Fleece of the materialist - does not even have a universal definition. In fact different fields of science use the term matter in different, and sometimes incompatible, ways." If this is shoddy science, MH2, if this something I vastly misunderstand, explain your own understanding and we can go from there.
And Dingus, kindly explain exactly what you mean by naval gazing. Then I'll tell you what it really means. I'll bet you a cheeseburger you have no idea whatsoever.
JL
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Jul 17, 2015 - 08:40pm PT
|
But we do need a common language and terms and definitions that, while they might not be objective correlates to mind, they might provide a starting point to cover some little ground (JL)
I agree.
If the very building blocks of the physical world have no effective size or volume . . .
If this is so, how many of these "building blocks" would it take to construct the head of the pin upon which angels dance? An infinite number over an eternity?
I'll bet you a cheeseburger you have no idea whatsoever
Alas, there goes no physical extent . . .
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Jul 18, 2015 - 07:54pm PT
|
JL:
I wil have one of my friends respond directly to whatever question you have, if in fact you have a question.
Where are the zeroes of the Riemann zeta function?
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Jul 18, 2015 - 08:46pm PT
|
aren't all zeroes basically relative to a change in direction?
other than binary code anyway.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Jul 18, 2015 - 09:50pm PT
|
. . . "just eat the steak" . . .
Argumentum ad lapidem?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_lapidem
Consciousness is a trap you can't get out of, so there's no way to account for anything other than itself. What it is lies beyond that non-conceptualization. All real or true conversations about it can't be had. Talking about it, hoping for either, is whistling in a dream. You can say anything you want, and deny everything. Doesn't matter. Turing's Test is for an idiot.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Jul 19, 2015 - 07:53am PT
|
MikeL,
Remember JL's example of the student meditator being struck by the teacher for showing lax posture? We make guesses about other peoples' consciousness all the time based on what we see of their behavior. Wherever consciousness comes from, it expresses itself as motor output from your brain. We do not require absolute and perfect knowledge of another person's consciousness for the myriad assumptions we make and act on during our social interactions. We are, however, largely dependent on those interactions for how our own consciousness has developed and how healthy it is. The only way you could have no knowledge of others' consciousness would be if you grew up isolated from all other organisms with nervous systems. What kind of consciousness would you have in that case?
We all make assumptions about what is going on in other heads based on what we see of behavior. That is what the Turing Test does, too.
It is true that people have differing ideas about what consciousness 'is.' People also have different ideas about what idiocy is.
Julio Cortázar
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Jul 19, 2015 - 09:51am PT
|
MH2: Wherever consciousness comes from, it expresses itself as motor output from your brain.
Hmmmm, maybe. I’m not sure. You are, apparently.
A few rather advanced (and perhaps wry) teachers make references to lives in stages of liberation as what might be considered “vampires.” They report circulating in worlds among what might be termed zombies—people who are not really awake or aware. (Funny how there is such a fascination about zombies in entertainment media these days, no?) People are lost in their dreams, living their dreams as though they were real. Yet, the substance of those realities cannot be found or pinned down. Everywhere one looks closely, one finds ambiguous evanescence. There always seems to be “something beyond” that will finally explain what THIS really is.
If there is a trick in any of this (from my point of view), it’s not the seeing of it. I think that anyone who is sincere and earnest can see that there’s nothing to grasp onto. The “trick” of it, if you will, is the living of it. In some circles, this is referred to as “taking meditation off the pillow.”
Cognitively, the spiritual life it’s a game that many people play. “Oh, none of that exists as we think it exists.” Advaita, for example, is philosophical, via negativa, and clever (like your run-of-the-mill solipsism, nihilism, existentialism, non dualism, idealism, etc.).
Yeah, sure, fine, but what’s your life like?
When the emptiness starts to seep into the interdependent fabric of your life, then some really interesting things start to occur, and many of them are not exactly comforting. There is an arising detachment from (the absurdity of) everyday conventions (viz., a lot of stupid conversations); and a sense of loneliness along with that as individual personality gets put on the side (not center stage about “what’s really important—ME!”). Liberation (that is, what I barely know about it) is not angels and sugar plums in the clouds in the sky. It’s not like that. Sure, it’s fascinating, but it gets lonely. Were it not for bliss that arises from being in-the-moment (mediation tends to bring that for every practiced meditator), many people might not continue.
You might be able to see how compassion arises concomitantly with emptiness, maybe even why they are the same thing. Compassion is the feeling of emptiness.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 19, 2015 - 12:29pm PT
|
MH2. Here ye go:
The Riemann zeta function satisfies the functional equation (known as the Riemann functional equation or Riemann's functional equation)
\zeta(s) = 2^s\pi^{s-1}\ \sin\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right)\ \Gamma(1-s)\ \zeta(1-s) \!,
where Γ(s) is the gamma function, which is an equality of meromorphic functions valid on the whole complex plane. This equation relates values of the Riemann zeta function at the points s and 1 − s.
Owing to the ZEROS of the sine function, the functional equation implies that ζ(s) has a simple ZERO at each even negative integer s = −2n — these are known as the trivial ZEROS of ζ(s).
--
There are other, they tell me, if you can follow that much of it. I have zero interest in this material.
JL
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Jul 19, 2015 - 12:45pm PT
|
at the points s and 1 − s.
Wouldn't this fall under my description?
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Jul 19, 2015 - 05:14pm PT
|
"\zeta(s) = 2^s\pi^{s-1}\ \sin\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right)\ \Gamma(1-s)\ \zeta(1-s) \!" (JL)
Printing this in code shows your utter disdain for mathematics and science, which you nevertheless use indiscriminately in attempts to advance your metaphysics. And, yes, I understand that if you wrote the actual math symbols it would not mean that much more to viewers.
However, this is pretty much a math interest, especially for those in analytic number theory, and has only a little to do with the physics you attempt to indulge. So you get a pass in my book.
Return perhaps to virtual particles or to even more interesting conjectures like tachyons or chronons. Better yet, steep yourself in category theory, which may be a way to mathematize your metaphysics.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!