Reality and realism
Ed Cryer
Viz. that reality is the notion of a world "in itself" beyond the
phenomenon, and that realism is the belief in such a world as the support
for the one we perceive?
Does particle physics give us any new perspective?
Ed
Sir Frederick
The latest skinny I have read indicates that we can't know.
We know there is something, but even that theory/story is
misleading, as the situation is no "thing" nor "something".
The information basis of Wheeler is the most basic analogy
I have seen. That said, more interest seems to be going
into cosmology cause the scopes keep getting better.
I expect a resurgence in interest in qualia soon.
For more realism what we need is a Newton or Einstein type to caste
the Principles of Information that show up physics
as a science of information, as chemistry is a science of physics
and as biology is a science of chemistry.
--
Best,
Frederick Martin McNeill
Poway, California, United States of America
mmcn...@fuzzysys.com
*************************
Phrase of the week :
"Sacrificing oneself for religion and
national interest is the peak of honor and bravery."
-- Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei
:-))))Snort!)
*************************
Roy Anderson
<mmcn...@fuzzysys.removethis.com> wrote:
>Ed Cryer wrote:
>>
>> Have we made any advance at all on what Kant said about the above?
>> Viz. that reality is the notion of a world "in itself" beyond the
>> phenomenon, and that realism is the belief in such a world as the support
>> for the one we perceive?
>>
>> Does particle physics give us any new perspective?
>>
>> Ed
>
>The latest skinny I have read indicates that we can't know.
>We know there is something, but even that theory/story is
>misleading, as the situation is no "thing" nor "something".
>The information basis of Wheeler is the most basic analogy
>I have seen. That said, more interest seems to be going
>into cosmology cause the scopes keep getting better.
>I expect a resurgence in interest in qualia soon.
>
>For more realism what we need is a Newton or Einstein type to caste
>the Principles of Information that show up physics
>as a science of information, as chemistry is a science of physics
>and as biology is a science of chemistry.
Your last paragraph makes me ponder. Could you go into more detail as
to what you mean?
I am intrigued.
-Roy Anderson
Sir Frederick
Which part? For the science of information part, see Siegfried's book
"The Bit and the Pendulum". "Bit" being information and "Pendulum"
being physics. The book has nothing to do with Poe. Just a "bit" of
humor. :-)
Sir Frederick
The Bit and the Pendulum: From Quantum Computing to M Theory-The New Physics of Information
by Tom Siegfried
Review :
Amazon.com
Information, for most of us, is an airy, abstract thing--the stuff of ideas, images, and symbols.
But for Tom Siegfried and the scientists he writes about in The Bit and the Pendulum: How the New
Physics of Information Is Revolutionizing Science, information has become something much more
fundamental to the workings of the world. "Information is real," Siegfried explains. "Information
is physical." What that means depends somewhat on the discipline it's applied to (cosmology,
particle physics, computer science, cognitive theory, and molecular biology are among the fields
examined here), but in general it comes down to the radically simple notion that the universe, at
its deepest levels, is made not of matter and energy but of bits. Information is real, yes. But
more to the point: reality, in some increasingly meaningful sense, is information.
So goes the argument anyway. And Siegfried, science editor of the Dallas Morning News, does a
pretty good job of presenting it. His prose, admittedly, puts the flat in flat-footed, and his
explanations of the relevant scientific phenomena (which include cool stuff like teleportation and
quantum-mechanical computing) are sometimes murkier than they ought to be. But his knowledge of the
last 10 years of theoretical research is sweeping, and he's especially deft with the tricky
philosophy-of-science issues that pervade his topic. Have scientists really discovered, in
information, the world's true foundation? Or have they simply found a handy new metaphor with which
to think about the world? Siegfried wisely comes down on neither side of the question. For him, the
power of metaphor is inseparable from the quest for scientific truth. And his book convincingly
suggests that information, as a concept, will be generating deep scientific truths for years to
come. --Julian Dibbell --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.
1Z
> Have we made any advance at all on what Kant said about the above?
> Viz. that reality is the notion of a world "in itself" beyond the
> phenomenon,
He never said that.
>and that realism is the belief in such a world as the support
> for the one we perceive?
>
realism is the belief that there are truths and falsehoods which
no-one has discovered yet.
Ed Cryer
"1Z" <peter...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fd762132.02050...@posting.google.com...
> "Ed Cryer" <e...@ecryer.freeserve.co.ukNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:<ab12sc$btc$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk>...
> > Have we made any advance at all on what Kant said about the above?
> > Viz. that reality is the notion of a world "in itself" beyond the
> > phenomenon,
>
> He never said that.
He did.
>
> >and that realism is the belief in such a world as the support
> > for the one we perceive?
> >
>
> realism is the belief that there are truths and falsehoods which
> no-one has discovered yet.
That's not "realism". You might call it something like optimism or progress.