Quantum Mechanical Paradox - Page 3 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

kerry · #31 09-27-2011, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tbomachines

I can't disagree, taking his thought somewhat radically can lead to the situations you listed. I wish I were more fluent in both him and Hegel but my area of study has focused more on contemporary philosophy (though not disregarding the significance of preceding work). I see both Kierkegaard and Hegel as having a vast impact on our notions of inquiry and being today, ushering in a more postmodern method of thinking despite the fact that the time in which they wrote was subject to a cultural, political, and societal obsession with religion and religiosity. Kerry do you have a background in philosophy?

I agree. My background is mostly in philosophical theology and philosophy of religion. Kierkegaard's effect is felt most strongly in religion thru the neo-orthodoxy of Karl Barth which contains both a Kierkegaardian leap of faith and a strong dose of biblical authoritarianism.

The Clk Man · #32 09-27-2011, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JollyRoger

Botnst is the media expert. I'm more into the quantum aspects. Did you know that if you look at someone when they are farting, they will not really be farting even though you can smell their fart?

Ahhh, the old "silent but violent" theory.

sjh · #33 09-27-2011, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

I think I get a sense of where this is going. Is 'God' an abstract symbol?

It's not going anywhere beyond what I've said.

No tricks. The physics is interesting (I find) and the difference between scientific truth and personal belief is just part of being alive.

No agenda besides, if you will, what I've quoted below.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjh

... I suggest that people should be more tolerant of other paradigms than the one they have embraced. In spite of their certainty, it has no unique claim to intellectual superiority or intrinsic greater claim on truth. ...

sjh · #34 09-27-2011, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

Hmmmm? What is the difference between a number and a word? Isn't a number a word with specific properties and relationships? Aren't abstract symbols just shortcuts for a longer set of words?

This is pure speculation, I am not a neurobiologist or something similar.

It appears that the mind processes words different than mathematical symbols.

I wouldn't be surprised in brain scans were performed of folks doing linguistic thought was meaningfully different than when they do numerical thought.

Pure speculation and self-observation.

sjh · #35 09-27-2011, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tbomachines

Take for example Einstein, perhaps the most scientifically influential figure of the last hundred years. In black holes his physics break into singularities which logically do not make sense either. Furthermore, check out the study that just came out declaring particles traveling faster than light--while there is much to be debated about that, it serves as an example illustrating how little we truly know.

When I was speaking of the clarity of math it would be most evident in pure and not applied mathematics.

Einstein's flaws where not with his mathematical prowess, which supposedly he viewed as an area of weakness but in how he chose to apply it.

An example of pure math would be Cantor's discovery of transfinite numbers. Supposedly he found the concept of numbers larger than infinity so disturbing that he was institutionalized. Nevertheless he persevered and created the field.

sjh · #36 09-27-2011, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

What exactly do you mean by this? That there are some things we don't know? If so, why not simply state that? As you state it, it appears that you are saying that there are areas or places in the universe which are not capable of being scientifically investigated. Where are these areas? How do you know they exist? What methods are you using to detect their existence?

All sorts of things fall outside of scientific inquiry (with experimental verification), ethics, morality, etc.

sjh · #37 09-27-2011, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

It seems to me that SJH is trying to make a kind of Kierkegaardian point. There are limits to what science can know. We yearn for more. SJH makes the irrational Kierkegaardian leap of faith into the loving arms of the christian god and is trying to explain that leap to us in rational terms. Other people stand at the end of the irrational abyss and say, "I'm not leaping. Or, I'm not leaping until I know more. Or, Leaping is a bad idea. Or, look what happened to her when she leaped. Or, I lept before and the landing was hard"

You read so much into my remarks that aren't present.

The physics is intriguing.

Different people have different beliefs.

I have replied ad nauseum to you that I have never been attracted to kierkegaard; the last time you tried to foist this blather on me I clearly stated -

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjh

... So if you are correct, we are only left with the Tertullian/Kierkegaardian/Barthian irrational leap of faith.

Whatever metaphors are used both reveal and slant. The term 'irrational leap' does violence to my soul. It is descriptive and has an accuracy but, for me it is jarring.

I work more with the image of a seed and a garden. The seed is planted. The soil is cared for. Time passes. Growth and change occurs. For me, this is much less jarring.

Time to stop construct a false image of me and attacking it.

kerry · #38 09-27-2011, 09:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjh

All sorts of things fall outside of scientific inquiry (with experimental verification), ethics, morality, etc.

It depends upon how ethics and morality are construed. For instance, utilitarianism can be seen as a kind of quasi if not actual scientific version of morality. Ethical thinking can also be studied scientifically to see which parts are likely to be hardwired into the brain and which parts are culturally induced.
Absolute moral obligations probably do fall outside of scientific inquiry so maybe they are outside any form of inquiry, except maybe for some kind of rational inquiry tested by their universality.

tbomachines · #39 09-27-2011, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjh

When I was speaking of the clarity of math it would be most evident in pure and not applied mathematics.

Einstein's flaws where not with his mathematical prowess, which supposedly he viewed as an area of weakness but in how he chose to apply it.

An example of pure math would be Cantor's discovery of transfinite numbers. Supposedly he found the concept of numbers larger than zero so disturbing that he was institutionalized. Nevertheless he persevered and created the field.

totally agree - and I think that point is pertinent to the conversation we have been having in this thread regarding language and subjectivity, which I tend to think goes into philosophy rather abruptly--with which Kerry and I seem to be pretty enthusiastic but I'd certainly be interested in hearing your input as well.

sjh · #40 09-27-2011, 11:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

It depends upon how ethics and morality are construed. For instance, utilitarianism can be seen as a kind of quasi if not actual scientific version of morality. Ethical thinking can also be studied scientifically to see which parts are likely to be hardwired into the brain and which parts are culturally induced.
Absolute moral obligations probably do fall outside of scientific inquiry so maybe they are outside any form of inquiry, except maybe for some kind of rational inquiry tested by their universality.

Science itself could not have explained the example that I posted in the OP without experimentation.

One of the main thrusts of the thread is that if one only has the intellect without experimental correction one cannot break free of the limits of our mind.

It's the correcting factor of experimental veracity that gives science its power.

All other disciplines with the exception of pure mathematics cannot reach the rigor and certitude of science.

So these other areas, which are valid and important have uncertainties and personal biases. We cannot escape that. As such let's be nicer (I mean humanity but it also applies to behavior here) to each other.

That's it. No attempt to secret attempt to convert anyone to any belief system. Just the limits of what we can know.

sjh · #41 09-27-2011, 11:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tbomachines

totally agree - and I think that point is pertinent to the conversation we have been having in this thread regarding language and subjectivity, which I tend to think goes into philosophy rather abruptly--with which Kerry and I seem to be pretty enthusiastic but I'd certainly be interested in hearing your input as well.

I have very poor skills and aptitude for philosophy. I do not know why. At one point in my silly youth I changed from a math/physics major to a philosophy major. Studied it for two semesters, dropped out of school, went to the desert in Arizona, ate a bunch of peyote and became lost for about 15 years.

When I finally (started) to make it back I acknowledged that I am quite limited in the area of philosophy.

It does seem that we mortals process words different than numbers.

I'm just trying to point out the limits of our wonderful minds and encourage a little more gentleness in terms of how we treat each other.

Thank you for your tone of voice.

tbomachines · #42 09-28-2011, 12:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjh

I have very poor skills and aptitude for philosophy. I do not know why. At one point in my silly youth I changed from a math/physics major to a philosophy major. Studied it for two semesters, dropped out of school, went to the desert in Arizona, ate a bunch of peyote and became lost for about 15 years.

When I finally (started) to make it back I acknowledged that I am quite limited in the area of philosophy.

It does seem that we mortals process words different than numbers.

I'm just trying to point out the limits of our wonderful minds and encourage a little more gentleness in terms of how we treat each other.

Thank you for your tone of voice.

Do not sell yourself short! The very inquiry into this field enables one to ask "bigger" questions and the ability to think creatively/critically and IMO these are the questions that influential individuals SHOULD be asking (and I don't mean that condescendingly - I definitely respect your expertise as I'm a young guy with a lot to learn). I find myself in the opposite situation actually, a fascination with quantum physics/astrophysics but stuck to cultural studies and philosophy (which I still enjoy) simply due to the inability to keep up with the extremely high math curriculum during my engineering years. I've recently been trying to figure out how to get an M.S. in either neuroscience or engineering given my background...gonna be a long and difficult haul but thats another story for another day.

sjh · #43 09-28-2011, 12:34 AM

When I entered college I had a photographic memory, could multiply two - 2 place numbers in my head almost instantaneously and was first in my university in both math and physics.

18 months and numerous stupidities later I struggled to pass my classes.

I have had to work to have a fraction of the innate abilities with which I was born.

So my chagrin about limits and losses is legitimate.

One thing about mathematical skills. In virtually all cases, the ability peaks in the 20's and then decreases. Most mathematicians have established their genius by 26 or so.

If you do not have an innate gift and you are past 23 or 24 than you'll probably need to accept that it will take daily repetition to be competent.

It's kinda like comparing weight-lifting when you are 18 to when you are 55. Both men may do the exact routine but the 18 year-old is going to have much more dramatic and easier results.

It sounds like you'll just need to exercise your mind on a near daily basis. However I think you'll only need 3 or 4 semesters of calc and diffy-Q. I don't think you'd need to go for third year math. Realistically that can be done, even if one is not innately gifted, just by brute effort.

Have you taken any math classes at a local CC? You should be able to get into a MS program and study some field of neurotechnology. I actually founded a neurotech company about 10 years ago. Here's a link to some of the initial work. It's quite dated and hasn't been maintained for about 5 years.

Rhthymic Audio Stimulation

tbomachines · #44 09-28-2011, 12:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjh

When I entered college I had a photographic memory, could multiply two - 2 place numbers in my head almost instantaneously and was first in my university in both math and physics.

18 months and numerous stupidities later I struggled to pass my classes.

I have had to work to have a fraction of the innate abilities with which I was born.

So my chagrin about limits and losses is legitimate.

One thing about mathematical skills. In virtually all cases, the ability peaks in the 20's and then decreases. Most mathematicians have established their genius by 26 or so.

If you do not have an innate gift and you are past 23 or 24 than you'll probably need to accept that it will take daily repetition to be competent.

It's kinda like comparing weight-lifting when you are 18 to when you are 55. Both men may do the exact routine but the 18 year-old is going to have much more dramatic and easier results.

It sounds like you'll just need to exercise your mind on a near daily basis. However I think you'll only need 3 or 4 semesters of calc and diffy-Q. I don't think you'd need to go for third year math. Realistically that can be done, even if one is not innately gifted, just by brute effort.

Have you taken any math classes at a local CC? You should be able to get into a MS program and study some field of neurotechnology. I actually founded a neurotech company about 10 years ago. Here's a link to some of the initial work. It's quite dated and hasn't been maintained for about 5 years.

Rhthymic Audio Stimulation

Not to brag, but I got 99th percentile on the math portion of my GREs...I honestly think I am very mathematically capable but just got too caught up in the "college life" freshman year when calc and DiffEQ were the most important (in hindsight) and my program was very highly rated/extremely stringent so I definitely lost out. Aced my engineering classes until math got really involved then I switched majors. Its been a bumpy road for me academically, I have a lot of interests and have spent significant time and effort attempting to become sort of an authority in a lot of subjects. I live by the motto "go big or go home". I want to learn everything there is to know in the world and then recreate it with a new flavor so everyone lives more comfortably and more knowledgeable...realistically not going to happen but that is how I live day to day and that is my goal. I am currently trying to volunteer as a lab tech at my gf's research lab (neuroscience) to get some experience under my belt. I have the research and statistical background to do so easily, it is a matter of them accepting me at this point. BTW I have heard very interesting things about RAS, specifically when paired with sensory isolation and binaural beats, but can't comment too much as I'm still learning about the area.

dannym · #45 09-28-2011, 08:47 AM

We have discussed Heisenberg before.

has anyone seen The Don?

You might want to check the closet. He's cowering in there trying to suppress the flashbacks!

Danny