jbml thln_004 (Martin) Julia Kristeva is here,
but that will have to wait a bit to be articulated.
By your act of hospitality - by making room for my words at your table - you accept the obligation to hear my narrative,
but also to suffer my narrative style, which will be difficult to follow unless I first explain my use of certain ideas from theoretical physics, especially time, space, interaction, and prediction.
Although my original intention was or quickly introduce a few abstract terms for later use, this digression has ballooned into several pages of occasionally dense discourse, and while the conclusions are relevant to our broader topic, the discussion itself may appear as something of a long detour.
The divergence between intent and outcome can be attributed to a teacher's narcissistic impulse to explain, or (equivalently?) to an ir-resistible anxiety that these conclusions, taken out of context and without simple examples, will give the impression of magic or super-stition. As an aid in reading the full discussion, or perhaps an alternative, I will first summarize my main conclusions. The purpose of the following section is to establish how contemporary physics grounds itself in these claims:
1. Physics builds models from three ingredients: idealized entities, relationships that characterize interaction among these entities, and physical principles that connect seemingly independent changes in these relationships over time. When the analog of an empirical phenomenon can be recognized in a model, the model is said to explain the phenomenon, despite numerous problems of interpretation that belong to philosophy of science.
2. Spatial and temporal distances are largely equivalent forms of separation. The quantitative expression of physical interactions often depends on the physical configuration, that is, on how objects are separated in space-time.
By your act of hospitality - by making room for my words at your table - you accept the obligation to hear my narrative,
but also to suffer my narrative style, which will be difficult to follow unless I first explain my use of certain ideas from theoretical physics, especially time, space, interaction, and prediction.
Although my original intention was or quickly introduce a few abstract terms for later use, this digression has ballooned into several pages of occasionally dense discourse, and while the conclusions are relevant to our broader topic, the discussion itself may appear as something of a long detour.
The divergence between intent and outcome can be attributed to a teacher's narcissistic impulse to explain, or (equivalently?) to an ir-resistible anxiety that these conclusions, taken out of context and without simple examples, will give the impression of magic or super-stition. As an aid in reading the full discussion, or perhaps an alternative, I will first summarize my main conclusions. The purpose of the following section is to establish how contemporary physics grounds itself in these claims:
1. Physics builds models from three ingredients: idealized entities, relationships that characterize interaction among these entities, and physical principles that connect seemingly independent changes in these relationships over time. When the analog of an empirical phenomenon can be recognized in a model, the model is said to explain the phenomenon, despite numerous problems of interpretation that belong to philosophy of science.
2. Spatial and temporal distances are largely equivalent forms of separation. The quantitative expression of physical interactions often depends on the physical configuration, that is, on how objects are separated in space-time.
05 mrt 2013 - bewerkt op 06 mrt 2013
- meld ongepast verhaal
Log in om een reactie te plaatsen.
- O 09 apr 2014 Yipyapyopkipkapkopliplaplopsipsapsoptijdtekortnews
- O 09 apr 2014 Mensen worden dus geconditioneerd om niet meer ~~~
- O 09 apr 2014 AI, robots die ouderen gezelschap houden, dat zal.
- O 09 apr 2014 Vàlt 'n menselijk brein wel te 'kopiëren'? "Er ìs
- O 09 apr 2014 EP: "Stel dat je Rex geen brein wilt geven, maar ~
- O 09 apr 2014 Uit de Trouwe Verdieping van Rel&Fil: Kèn Jezèlf ~
- O 09 apr 2014 Wishful thinking, longing for love & our illusions
- O 09 apr 2014 Arthur C. Clarke: science made G d/Allah great{er}
- O 08 apr 2014 Geloof, veronderstelling, wetenschap & zekerheden?
- O 08 apr 2014 Uit voorgaande feiten volgt, dat intelligentie is
- O 08 apr 2014 Teveel mensen, overigens zeer ontwikkeld, dachten
- O 08 apr 2014 Laten we veronderstellen dat al die gegevens ook ~
- O 08 apr 2014 Er is ook eerder & vaker gezegd dat niemand zich
- O 08 apr 2014 Jíj hebt deze avonturen meegemaakt i/d loop ~~~~~~
- O 08 apr 2014 Het bewustzijn werkt dus 'in 't vooruit', ~~~~~~~~