29 September 2015

Notes - replaceable / shut up / wonder up / metaphysics

         Late morning. Carol has been washing clothes and readying for her luncheon with her retired younger colleagues at Blue Ash Elementary (Sycamore Community Schools) at the Silver Spring House Restaurant on the corner of Kemper and Snyder Roads at twelve thirty. You just finished reading the November issue of Consumer Reports and before that the October issue of National Geographic for a change in the daily pace. – Amorella

         1118 hours. I read them both cover to cover, something of a rarity. The day is gray cast and rainy, a good morning for reading; and both magazines arrived yesterday, so they are fresh news, so to speak. The most interesting N.G. article is “Mystery Man” about the Homo naledi of the Rising Star Cave in South Africa. The best in C.R. is “Lies, Secrets and Scams” on how senior citizens are taken by hucksters of all sorts. Some seniors lose their life savings by fraud. Both magazines (their varied articles) mirror major aspects of our modern cultures.

         1134 hours. I wonder what my character Yermey would find interesting and think upon by reading both magazines today? What if there was nothing left of Homo sapiens on the Earth but these two newly dated magazines? What could be inferred from their pages about our species and our cultural ways by just the contents of the October issue of National Geographic and the November issue of Consumer Reports?

         Carol is leaving for her younger-oriented retirees. Her luncheon on Thursday, the Blue Ash Retired Teacher’s (BART), meet. These are mostly older retired teachers that the younger one’s never taught along side of. Carol began her teaching when the original Blue Ash School was at the corner of Kenwood and Cooper Roads. It was replaced some decades ago with a shopping mall. – Amorella

         1204 hours. We are all replaceable, Amorella.

         In physical parts alone, yes, that is the case, boy. Post. - Amorella



         1319 hours. I did something rather foolish by posting a comment on shamanism on a FB page I cannot remember. I didn’t agree with what the writer and had written. I don’t even remember what I wrote, but it is not my place to say what is and what it is not, particularly uninvited, and even worse, when I do not know what the truth is about shamanism. – rho

         You asked me internally if you should leave your comment on the page. I did not respond. Who knows why you did? Now you can’t find the page though it is one recommended by the Facebook page, Conscious Standpoint, whose video you recently shared from your Facebook artist friend, Robert Frank. – Amorella

         1329 hours. I like the abstract pictures/painting I discovered on ‘Conscious Standpoint’. I use words to depict the esoteric, others, like C.S and Robert Frank use visuals. Visuals are refreshing to me.

         Post. – Amorella
        
         1332 hours. I need to just shut up. 



         Mid-afternoon. You are over at the Mason Community Center waiting for Carol to walk her mile at the indoor track as it is still raining, and rain is what the community needs this month. – Amorella

         1521 hours. I watched most of the recent “Vicious” while eating fat free cottage cheese for lunch before Carol arrived home; she worked on the mail; I went upstairs. Jadah followed and we had an unscheduled forty-five minute nap. I probably needed it as much as she did.

         You are a bit under the weather today, literally as well as figuratively. The news has died down about discovering flowing Martian saltwater and aliens are no longer a topic in mind. – Amorella

         1541 hours. I don’t think of you as an alien, Amorella.

         From my perspective no one or thing is alien anywhere. – Amorella

         1542 hours. I suppose that is right. If you feel as though you are an – if forget the word. Not a good day for conversation, Amorella.

         You and Carol are home with plans to go to Panera for supper later.

** **
From Your Quora Digest

Why is Schrodinger's cat alive and dead instead of alive or dead?

Viktor Toth, IT pro, part-time physicist

8.8k Views • Viktor has 12 endorsements in Physics.

Schrödinger's cat is not alive and/or dead. This is a decades-old mischaracterization of a whimsical thought experiment.

Before I explain, let me bring up another thought experiment: an apparatus (e.g., a two-slit experiment) in which a particle, say an electron, can take two different paths to get to its destination (e.g., a screen). The interference pattern that we observe on the screen tells us that individual electrons did not follow definite paths; rather, they took both paths simultaneously, which an electron can do so long as it is not "caught in the act", i.e., not observed. And just looking at the point of impact of an individual electron does not allow us to reconstruct a specific path either... the electron was really in two (or more) places at once. The electron has no well-defined position until it interacts with its environment (that is to say, a macroscopic apparatus) that measures its position.

In the famous kitty-cat thought experiment, something similar to the electron, a quantum system that can exist in a superposition of two states, is used to trigger a mechanism to kill a cat. The cat, the fable goes, exists in both states at once until the box is opened, at which point it collapses into a well-defined (alive or dead) state.

Nonsense. When I open the box and I find a live cat, I have zero doubt in my mind that the cat was alive all along. Similarly, when I open the box and the cat is dead, I can solicit the help of a qualified veterinarian and ascertain the exact time the cat died (or better yet, just put a camera set to record into the box along with the cat.) Unlike the two-slit particle experiment, in which case no definite path can be reconstructed even after the particle impacts the screen and is measured, for the cat, its history can be reconstructed unambiguously. The wavefunction of the particle triggering the mechanism decohered when it interacted with a large, complex system with many degrees of freedom (namely, the cat); it did not have to wait for the box to be opened.

Yes, quantum mechanics can be counterintuitive and sometimes difficult to reconcile with everyday experience. But not this difficult. The "cat is alive and dead" thing is just nonsense that stands in the way of understanding; it does not improve understanding. (Of course Schrödinger was no fool either; he offered this thought experiment as a means to ridicule certain ideas, now somewhat outdated in the light of quantum field theory, about the interpretation of quantum mechanics.)

Selected and edited from - quoraDOTcom

** **

         You wonder on the article, as it were. What else can be done? Post. - Amorella


         Some errands and a stop at Chipotle/Panera for supper, then a stop at Carter’s and Hallmark before heading home. Carol mentioned she didn’t feel up to sorts today also and blames it on your flu shots yesterday afternoon. You agree. – Amorella

         After a couple more errands and supper you arrived home to watch NBC News a half hour late and then last night’s new “NCIS-LA”. – Amorella

         2043 hours. I feel much better knowing that my ‘off day’ is probably caused by the senior flu shot. I don’t have a reaction every year but sometimes. I asked Carol earlier about staying at the condo a second week if the weather’s good. She thinks it’s a good idea. I’ll have to see what Chris and Larry (the owners of the condo) say.

         Time for bed, early tonight for a change. Post. – Amorella

         2138 hours. I wonder what would be the Metaphysical Equivalent of a Physical Quantum Entangling Event?

       You could save some time by first defining a metaphysical event. Something to sleep on, boy.   - Amorella

       2208 hours. I have come up with two definitions of 'metaphysics' but not yet a contextual 'event'.

       Add and post. - Amorella


** **
metaphysics

Definition of metaphysics in English:

plural noun

[USUALLY TREATED AS SINGULAR]
1
The branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including abstract concepts such as being, knowing, substance, cause, identity, time, and space.

Metaphysics has two main strands: that which holds that what exists lies beyond experience (as argued by Plato), and that which holds that objects of experience constitute the only reality (as argued by Kant, the logical positivists, and Hume). Metaphysics has also concerned itself with a discussion of whether what exists is made of one substance or many, and whether what exists is inevitable or driven by chance

Origin
Mid 16th century: representing medieval Latin metaphysica (neuter plural), based on Greek ta meta ta phusika 'the things after the Physics', referring to the sequence of Aristotle's works: the title came to denote the branch of study treated in the books, later interpreted as meaning 'the science of things transcending what is physical or natural'.

Definition of metaphysics in:

Selected and edited from oxforddictionariesDOTcom

** **
A second definition of metaphysics from emporiaDOTedu:

** **

1. Metaphysics, a definition.

A beginning definition of metaphysics involves the word itself. Meta-physics is Greek for "after-nature." Thus metaphysics is concerned with the question of what exists beyond nature, or does something invisible support the visible world? For example, we do see part of the world before us. Is this all there is to it? Is there more that we cannot see? If so, how can we know about it?

Metaphysics is far more complicated than asking the question of what exists beyond nature. It is interested in the nature of nature, space, time, number of basic elements in the world, motion, change, causality, and other issues.2

One of the early definitions of metaphysics was that of Aristotle, who wrote:

There is a science, which investigates being qua being and what belongs essentially to it. This science is not the same as any of the so-called "special sciences"; for none of these sciences examine universally being qua being, but, cutting off some part of it, each of them investigates the attributes of that part, as in the case of the mathematical sciences.3

Aristotle proceeds to talk about being as distinct from various disciplines. Similarly, metaphysics has been called "the science of sciences"4 because it is not merely interested in the accumulation of facts only, but in systematic reflection on these facts uncovered by various scientific disciplines. The inadequacy of traditional discipline lines is indicated by the crossing of the lines such as biochemistry, biophysics, astro-physics, and others.

Metaphysics has overtones of another discipline, religion. Religion is also interested in what it means to be, and whether there is reality beyond the natural world. However, religion suffers severe criticism from a number of modern metaphysicians. A.E. Taylor, who is quite sympathetic to religion in many ways, claims that metaphysics deals with ultimate questions "in a purely scientific spirit; its object is intellectual satisfaction, and its method is not one to appeal to immediate intuition or unanalyzed feeling, but of the critical and systematic analysis of our conceptions."5 Taylor's view relegates all religious thinkers to the level of romantics or irrationalists. Heidegger similarly rules out an appeal to the God of the Bible, because "a believer cannot question without ceasing to be a believer."6

In both Taylor and Heidegger there is the feeling or presumption that believers are not thinkers. But what about the atheist who begins his thought with only nature and after examining the alternatives concludes that the God of the Bible makes more sense in his attempt to understand the metaphysical issues? Neither Taylor nor Heidegger are true to the spirit of metaphysics. They rule out beforehand a possible answer that might be of great help.

One of the traditional criticisms against metaphysics is that it demands too many presuppositions to begin. The ideal is always to begin without presuppositions. Can metaphysics be systematic and conclusive if it omits an area of investigation for help? Metaphysics is not religion, but if metaphysics is to seek an understanding of the totality of nature, it would seem that it should not deliberately ignore religion. If metaphysics is to be the science of the sciences, or the science of being, then nothing should be ruled out and everything will be examined with equal fervor.”

Selected from - CHAPTER VI Metaphysics: Definitions and Issues
Part I - http://www.emporiaDOTedu/socsci/research-and-teaching-links/philosophy-book/chp6.html

** **





No comments:

Post a Comment