So this is something I've mentioned a few times but haven't found a better way to explain. This is the experiment that ended the debate on whether electrons and other subatomic particles are waves or particles- the answer being, it depends on what kind of measurement you are taking. This idea is really helpful in understanding the reason for using a "multi-model approach" as we need both models of subatomic particles to understand what's "really" happening, and we also realized that it was our own biases which were making the phenomena occur or seem strange. Once we stop confusing language (map) for the actual event (territory), the seemingly contradictory nature of using both models to describe the subatomic world fades away. The question ceases to be, "is light particles or is light waves?" and becomes: "What does looking at light as waves help us discover about the nature of things?" and "What does looking at light as particles help us discover about the nature of things?"
Sorry for the corny animation, but this the best summary of the experiment that I could find. it is an oversimplification for sure, but it gets the point across.
Ryan Chitwood's Senior Thesis Ideas & Experiments.
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
Some new books
Really pumped as I got a couple of books while on break.
Tonight I was just loaned a book about Sufism, The Way of the Sufi, which is a mystic tradition that arose from the Islamic tradition but is much like Zen. (lots of brief seemingly contradictory statements, allegories and poetic riddles,)
I also received my copy of Alfred Korzybski's Science and Sanity. I've been trying to get a copy but the Columbus library system doesn't have a copy and they were no cheaper than 60 bucks online. However, one finally showed up for 30 bucks and I nabbed it.
I think, if I can read a substantial portion of it, it will likely have a great impact on my solution. It is one of the primary texts on General Semantics, which Korzybski describes, "In general semantics we are concerned with teh sanity of the race, including particularly methods of prevention; eliminating from home, elementary, and higher education inadequate aristotelian [either/or, a or not a] types of evaluation which too often lead to the un-sanity of the race, and building up for the first time a positive theory of sanity, as a workable non-aristotelian system."
Tonight I was just loaned a book about Sufism, The Way of the Sufi, which is a mystic tradition that arose from the Islamic tradition but is much like Zen. (lots of brief seemingly contradictory statements, allegories and poetic riddles,)
I also received my copy of Alfred Korzybski's Science and Sanity. I've been trying to get a copy but the Columbus library system doesn't have a copy and they were no cheaper than 60 bucks online. However, one finally showed up for 30 bucks and I nabbed it.
I think, if I can read a substantial portion of it, it will likely have a great impact on my solution. It is one of the primary texts on General Semantics, which Korzybski describes, "In general semantics we are concerned with teh sanity of the race, including particularly methods of prevention; eliminating from home, elementary, and higher education inadequate aristotelian [either/or, a or not a] types of evaluation which too often lead to the un-sanity of the race, and building up for the first time a positive theory of sanity, as a workable non-aristotelian system."
Sunday, December 26, 2010
Definitions: Ontology, Guerilla Ontology, Aristotelian/Non-Aristotelian
Important Concepts Relating to My Thesis
Ontology -
Via Wikipedia:
concerns the determining of whether some categories of being are fundamental and asks in what sense the items in those categories can be said to "be". It is the inquiry into being in so much as it is being, or into beings insofar as they exist—and not insofar as, for instance, particular facts obtained about them or particular properties related to them.
Some philosophers, notably of the Platonic school, contend that all nouns (including abstract nouns) refer to existent entities. Other philosophers contend that nouns do not always name entities, but that some provide a kind of shorthand for reference to a collection of either objects or events. In this latter view, mind, instead of referring to an entity, refers to a collection of mental events experienced by a person; society refers to a collection of persons with some shared characteristics, and geometry refers to a collection of a specific kind of intellectual activity.
Via Merriam Webster:
a branch of metaphysics concerned with the nature and relations of being
Guerrilla Ontology-
Loosely inspired by Guerrilla Warfare, it is a way of presenting information, whether fictional or informational, which deliberately organizes the information in such a way that the viewer/audience must constantly question the truth of what is being communicated. The end result being that the viewer becomes more skeptical and less apt to believe any one thing over all other things.
Aristotelian:
For the purposes of my discussion, I will used in the work of Alfred Korzybski and Robert Anton Wilson - Aristotelianism refers to a dogmatic belief in an "either/or" logic. In other words, logic which implies that all things are either 100% true/real or 0% true/real (false).
Why I think it "is" bad:
It is my belief that this kind of logic system, left unchecked, allows for generalizations which oversimplify ideas to the point where they have no actual connection to reality. This plays into the confusion of value judgments (or opinions) with facts. I believe this to be directly related to the appearance of all forms of prejudice, which acts against the human race's best interests.
Non-Aristotelian:
Allows for multiple valued logic: i.e. "maybe logic"Depends on the idea that there is never a 1 to 1 ratio of proof to idea. This comes from the notion that one cannot experience/witness/apprehend all of the universe forever, which would be the only true way to determine the truth of an idea Asserts that all information we can communicate about is closer to a model of the universe than the universe itself and that models can be improved to better interact with the universe.
Ontology -
Via Wikipedia:
concerns the determining of whether some categories of being are fundamental and asks in what sense the items in those categories can be said to "be". It is the inquiry into being in so much as it is being, or into beings insofar as they exist—and not insofar as, for instance, particular facts obtained about them or particular properties related to them.
Some philosophers, notably of the Platonic school, contend that all nouns (including abstract nouns) refer to existent entities. Other philosophers contend that nouns do not always name entities, but that some provide a kind of shorthand for reference to a collection of either objects or events. In this latter view, mind, instead of referring to an entity, refers to a collection of mental events experienced by a person; society refers to a collection of persons with some shared characteristics, and geometry refers to a collection of a specific kind of intellectual activity.
Via Merriam Webster:
a branch of metaphysics concerned with the nature and relations of being
Guerrilla Ontology-
Loosely inspired by Guerrilla Warfare, it is a way of presenting information, whether fictional or informational, which deliberately organizes the information in such a way that the viewer/audience must constantly question the truth of what is being communicated. The end result being that the viewer becomes more skeptical and less apt to believe any one thing over all other things.
Aristotelian:
For the purposes of my discussion, I will used in the work of Alfred Korzybski and Robert Anton Wilson - Aristotelianism refers to a dogmatic belief in an "either/or" logic. In other words, logic which implies that all things are either 100% true/real or 0% true/real (false).
Why I think it "is" bad:
It is my belief that this kind of logic system, left unchecked, allows for generalizations which oversimplify ideas to the point where they have no actual connection to reality. This plays into the confusion of value judgments (or opinions) with facts. I believe this to be directly related to the appearance of all forms of prejudice, which acts against the human race's best interests.
Non-Aristotelian:
Allows for multiple valued logic: i.e. "maybe logic"Depends on the idea that there is never a 1 to 1 ratio of proof to idea. This comes from the notion that one cannot experience/witness/apprehend all of the universe forever, which would be the only true way to determine the truth of an idea Asserts that all information we can communicate about is closer to a model of the universe than the universe itself and that models can be improved to better interact with the universe.
Street Campaign concept idea #2
Posters dealing with the question "where does sound exist/occur?". Each one with a different answer to the question, illustrated using the, "If a tree falls and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?" riddle.
The answers (as far as I can determine)
a) sound is the waves of vibrating air
b) sound is the brain's interpretations of the signals sent by the ears
c) sound is the product of the eardrum
d) sound is a release of energy from a body.
there are other ways these could be stated, but the point is that each of them is correct, in part. Of course, all of those things together describe the word "sound" more accurately than any one of them alone. A series of posters, each stating a different answer to the question, would be seen individually in different public places. The idea that they are seen in different places, isolated from the rest of the answers, comes from the connection of place and person. Who we are is largely a result of what we have experienced, where we have been, in the big picture. Perhaps I could apply one "model," per section of town, say there are 100 copies of one of the posters in Clintoville and 100 posters with a different answer in the Short North. This would create the sort of Guerrilla Ontology* I am looking for, because you begin to get it only if you see the different posters, if you see them all, you are more likely to question and decide that all of them are true in some sense and false in another, perhaps realizing that the word is just a simplification which doesn't include ALL the information.
Feedback, please!
*see previous post for definition
The answers (as far as I can determine)
a) sound is the waves of vibrating air
b) sound is the brain's interpretations of the signals sent by the ears
c) sound is the product of the eardrum
d) sound is a release of energy from a body.
there are other ways these could be stated, but the point is that each of them is correct, in part. Of course, all of those things together describe the word "sound" more accurately than any one of them alone. A series of posters, each stating a different answer to the question, would be seen individually in different public places. The idea that they are seen in different places, isolated from the rest of the answers, comes from the connection of place and person. Who we are is largely a result of what we have experienced, where we have been, in the big picture. Perhaps I could apply one "model," per section of town, say there are 100 copies of one of the posters in Clintoville and 100 posters with a different answer in the Short North. This would create the sort of Guerrilla Ontology* I am looking for, because you begin to get it only if you see the different posters, if you see them all, you are more likely to question and decide that all of them are true in some sense and false in another, perhaps realizing that the word is just a simplification which doesn't include ALL the information.
Feedback, please!
*see previous post for definition
Friday, December 17, 2010
Hey, leave general questions in the comments!
Please feel free to ask questions, start discussions, tell me it doesn't make sense here. Unless they are about a specific post of course.
Robert Anton Wilson - Maybe Logic
This compilation of interviews and lectures has some great examples of what I'm thinking about.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)