[MD] Uncertainty

[MarshaV]

Ian,

Physics professor said John Bell proved Einstein in EPR paper absolutely
wrong.  I will get 'The Cartoon History of Time', it's all too interesting
not to continue the investigation.  What a soap opera!  And so many loose
wiggling threads to follow.  Greedy reductionism?  I've heard that phrase
before, maybe from dmb.

And in Matt's book, Plato is shrinking. There's not a lot of satisfaction,
because I keep asking why did he rule supreme for so long?  No answer there
either, I suppose.

I love books.  


Marsha 




 


-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of Ian Glendinning
Sent: Monday, September 07, 2009 2:32 AM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] Uncertainty

Thanks Marsha,

I do thoroughly recommend "The Cartoon History of Time".
Must look out for Matt's recommendation too - thanks for reminding me
- defence of rhetoric sounds right up our Pirsigian street.

"Determinism" is a subject worth thinking about - not necessarily just
from the perspective of Einstein's concerns. Dennett does a good line
in explaining why any of us believing (trusting) in free-will at the
human scale, should not fear apparent determinism at physical scales.
He calls it "greedy reductionism" to suggest that determinism at one
level implies determinism in another. (Ditto the confusion between
probability and randomness in one level and behaviours in another more
complex level.)

Causation is not quite as straight-forward as Einstein's common sense,
when crossing levels, up and/or down. Which, perversely, is why I
believe Einstein was more right than Bohr when it comes to
"correspondence" between quantum (unobservable) and classical
(observable) scales - but I digress.

Regards
Ian

On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 3:05 PM, MarshaV<valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
> Greetings Ian,
>
> It is too bad the physicist cannot climb outside of their indoctrination
to
> hear how some of those explanations sound to the non-scientist.  Voodoo!
> But I suppose that goes for metaphysics too.
>
> Very nice review for an excellent book.  I might like to read some of the
> other books you've mentioned.
>
> I've been thinking about Einstein's need for determinism, and 'cause and
> effect'.  Maybe something like 'an event comes into being by a complexity
of
> quality (context)' seems to move past determinism and more reflects the
'net
> of jewels' model of experience.  Just playing with words...
>
> I'm now starting to read Matt's suggestion, 'In Defence of Rhetoric' by
> Brian Victers.  I'm looking forward to seeing Plato trounced.
>
>
> Marsha
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
> [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of Ian
Glendinning
> Sent: Sunday, September 06, 2009 8:37 AM
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Subject: Re: [MD] 'Uncertainty
>
> Hi Marsha, I guess that's an impossible question, since an open, but
> sceptical mind might not be "indoctrinated", particularly if the
> "teachers" were of a wiser philosophical kind ?
>
> I think the "indoctrination" actually happens much more informally
> through memes in the wider public consciousness. I think anyone
> seriously researching a subject, like yourself who "really wants to
> know", would tend not to be brainwashed.
>
> I blogged a review after finishing Lindley's book.
> http://www.psybertron.org/?p=2639
>
> Regards
> Ian
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/