clark (clark@netsites.net)
Fri, 20 Mar 1998 05:18:35 +0100
----------
> From: andrew_russell/fs/ksg@ksg.harvard.edu
> To: Multiple recipients of <lilasqd@mail.hkg.com>
> Subject: LS Sir James Jeans
> Date: Wednesday, March 18, 1998 9:31 PM
>
> andrew russell/fs/ksg
> 03/18/98 10:31 PM
>
> To: lilasqd@hkg.com
>
> cc:
> "Sir James Jeans was a mathematician, physicist, and astronomer. He made
> fundamental contributions to the dynamical theory of gases, the
> mathematical theory of electromagnetism, the evolution of gaseous stars,
> the nature of nebulae - to name a few. He was knighted in 1924, and went
on
> to become one of the most popular and prominent philosophers of science."
>
> Not at the top of my list, but speaking as a physicist, he validates the
> notion that science and ratioanlity is less than comprehensive:
>
> "The outsatnding achievement of twentieth century physics is not the
theory
> of relativity with its welding together of space and time, or the theory
of
> quanta with its apparent negation of the laws of causation, or the
> dissection of the atom with the resultant discovery that things are not
> what they seem; it is the general recognition that we are not yet in
> contact with the ultimate reality. We are still imprisoned in our own
cave,
> with our backs to the light, and can only watch the shadows on the wall."
>
> Sir James Jeans, _The Mysterious Universe_
>
> sorry to use the words of others so often to get my points across. it's
> just that they say it so much better than I do....
>
>
>
> --
> post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com
> unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com
> homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
Andrew,
Lots of mail yesterday and today. New blood and an apparent watershed in
the squad thinking has us all stirred up.
It seems to me that much of the philosophical squirming that has gone on
since whenever is a recognition of the subject-object division, or against
the deterministic view of the universe.
Without having thought this through, I find it easier and more pleasant
if I develop ideas under pressure of disagreement than if I just rare back
and cold bloodedly philosophize, to my mind the beginnings of the universe
as we now understand it are purely deterministic. I think what some people
violently react to is when we bring that determinism in an unbroken chain
from the beginning to the present. If we do this we deprive ourselves of
independence and free will. With this viewpoint I tend to agree. I don't
want to be without choice either.
I think that the thing that makes the idea of a deterministic universe
tenable is the injection of deterministic disorder (chaos) into the
equation. The theory of Chaos gives us a way to inject enough disorder into
the evolution of the universe to give us at least the illusion of free
will. In this way we can have a deterministic universe with enough apparent
disorder so that we can effectively have free will. As the saying goes, we
can have our cake and eat it too. Ken Clark
-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:56 CEST