Einstein "fingers" and relativity
Albretch Mueller
he somehow said that he could imagine what happen with space/time
through some weird play with his own fingers. Seriously. I am a
theoretical physicist myself and to me that was a very weird,
confusing and unpedagogical thing to hear, but I found it interesting
nevertheless. It is virtually impossible to search for: Einstein
fingers and get what you need
Do you know what I am talking about? Could you help get to the source
of it?
Thank you
lbrtchx
Albretch Mueller
and the hard problem of consciousness. We all quale things in homely
ways and I was amazed that even Einstein was honestly telling was
about some of his own craze in relation to the physical theories he
authored
lbrtchx
{sci.physics.relativity, sci.psychology.misc, alt.philosophy}
Albretch Mueller
wrote:
> On Nov 15, 8:07 am, Albretch Mueller <lbrt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I remember once I read some comments fromEinsteinhimself in which
> > he somehow said that he could imagine what happen with space/time
> > theoretical physicist myself and to me that was a very weird,
> > confusing and unpedagogical thing to hear, but I found it interesting
> > nevertheless. It is virtually impossible to search for:Einstein
>
> > Do you know what I am talking about? Could you help get to the source
> > of it?
>
> > Thank you
> > lbrtchx
>
>
> Isaac Newton's greatness could have been the sensitivity of his
> "feelings" as well as his clarity of thoughts. He could translate what
> he feels into quantitative mechanics.
> 1) friction - he moves his palms (fingers?) over his study table and
> understands the notion of friction.
> 2) inertial - he imagines sliding over ice over a pond in winter and
> understands how without friction, of idealized "smoothness", things
> would travel on without change in velocity.
> 3) force = mass x acceleration - others could have been caught with
> force proportional to speed, but Newton ( from 2) above) jumped to d2x/
> dt2 and not just dx/dt.
> 4) action=reaction - Newton's sensitivity would now have missed that
> from playing with a rope or bumping his head against a pillar, etc
> 5) so what he needed was the mathematics of changes (in distance,
> speed, space, time). So he invented calculus to put his ideas into
> mathematical forms.
>
> So Isaac Newton's greatness may not be just the brain as everyone
> imagines, but might as well be his exceptional ability to feel about
> everyday phenomena.
~
Thank you physics_inquiry, it is somewhat funny to see the
characteristic reaction physicists have when you try to talk to them
about such matters or musicians when you tell them about the Physics/
Math underlying Music ;-)
~
I don't really think that Newton had any exceptional ability to
perceive or -feel- about anything. He was just cultured and trained
into physics and yes, part of what made him a great physicist was his
own psychological investment (part of which seems to relate to him as
many other great physicists/mathematicians/thinkers being
Aspergerees ;-))
~
Sure our extero-senses help us conceptualize such matters as friction
and heat and our intero- ones time, balance and orientation, yet I see
still a great difference between your point and Einstein's finger
business, since they dont' really, straightforwardly relate to the
relatively more "abstract" theories he authored. Unfairly trivializing
your comments, I don't think that a ski sportsperson is a better
candidate to understand "friction"
~
We physicists have this silly user illusion about physical matters
being based on some kind of fixed, absolute reality which our theories
continually (and asymptotically) approximate (which to me is similar
to thinking that we humans were created/destined by God in more or
less complicity with nature), but the huge problems we have with
current theories (such as finding "logical" interpretations of the
double-slit experiment) may be based to a large extent on our very
underlying notions. We refuse to see that our minds/epistemic
engagements are very much part of our "-physical- reality"
~
lbrtchx