Ads Right Header

What is "The Life Cycle of Science" - Knowledgekira


“There was a time when newspapers said that only twelve men understood the theory of relativity. I don't believe there was ever such a time ... On the other hand, I think it's safe to say that no one understands quantum mechanics ... Don't tell yourself, if you can avoid it, But how can it be like that? ', Because you will put the' drain 'in a blind alley from where no one has survived yet. Nobody knows how this can happen. "

R. P. Feynman (1967)

"The first processes, therefore, in the effective study of science, must be the simplification and reduction of the results of previous investigations, so that the mind can understand them."

J. C. Maxwell, on the lines of Faraday

"... The traditional forms of quantum theory and quantum field theory, in particular, are unprofessional and obscure. Professional theoretical physicists should be able to do better. Bohm has shown us a way."

John S. Bell, Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics

"For the outward appearance, the modern world was born out of an anti-religious movement: Man was causing self-reliance and irrational belief. Both our generation and before have heard very little about the conflict between science and faith; In fact, it was concluded for a moment that the former was destined to take the place of the latter ... After two centuries of fierce conflicts, neither science nor faith would discredit its adversary Has been successful in

On the contrary, it becomes clear that neither can develop normally without the other. And the reason is simple: one life represents both. Neither in its inspiration nor in its achievements can science go to its limits without tampering with mysticism and charged with faith. "

Pierre Thierry de Chardin, "The Phenomenon of Man"

I found John S. by the main proponent (actually a choice rather than an interpretation) of the Bohemian Mechanics interpretation of quantum mechanics. Bell opened this appendix with a long section. The well-known physicist, David Bohm (in the 50s), embedded the Schrodinger equation (SE in this article) into a deterministic physical theory, based on work long ago by de Broglie (the reluctant father of wave-particle dualism). A non-Newtonian motion of particles was posted.

It is a good example of the life cycle of scientific theories, consisting of three stages: growth, transitional pathology, and ossification.

Witchcraft, religion, alchemy, and science succeeded each other and such an infection was reminiscent of psychological disorders by transitional pathology. Exceptions are (of course) medicine and biology. An incident in the atonement of knowledge will make a fascinating text.

Science is currently in its Ossification phase. It is soon to be succeeded by another discipline or magisterium. Other explanations of the current state of science must be rejected: that human knowledge is limited by its nature, that the world is inherently incomprehensible, that modes of thought and understanding organize themselves to form closed mythological systems And it is that problem with language that we employ to make our inquiry of the world descriptive and communicative.

Kuhn's approach to scientific revolutions is one of the many issues of scientific thought and consequently the theory and paradigm that develops. Scientific theories appear to be subject to a process of natural selection because organisms are very numerous in nature.

Animals can be thought of as a theorem (with positive truth value) in the logical system "nature". But species become extinct because nature itself changes (not nature as a set of potentials - but relevant natural phenomena from which species are exposed). Can we say the same about scientific theories? Are they being selected and canceled partly due to changing, changing backgrounds?

Indeed, the whole debate between "realists" and "anti-realists" in the philosophy of science can be settled by adopting this single premise: that the universe itself is not immutable. Anti-realists gained the upper hand - in contrast to the determined subject of study ("the world") with the ephemeral nature of science.

Arguments such as the under-determination of theories by data and pessimistic meta-induction (scientific "knowledge") from previous falsities emphasize the fickle and asymptomatic nature of the fruit of scientific endeavor. But such arguments rest on the implicit assumption that there is something universal, immutable, true (which properly approximates science). This apparent problematic evaporation occurs if we allow that the theory and its subjects, both observer and observed, are variable.

Science develops from a lack of miracles. The laws of nature are made. They are believed to surround all (relevant) natural phenomena (that is, phenomena governed by natural forces and within nature). The former definition, nothing can exist outside nature - it is all-inclusive and all-pervasive or omnipresent (formerly the attributes of God).

The supernatural force, supernatural interference, there are contradictions in words, an oxymoron. If something or force exists - it is natural. That which is supernatural - does not exist. Miracles not only violate (or violate) the laws of nature - they are impossible, not only physically, but also logically. One that is logically possible and can be experienced (observed), physically possible.

"It seems that theory [quantum mechanics] is particularly concerned about 'measurement results', and has nothing more to say about it. What exactly do some physical systems need to play the role of 'measurement'?" Lol? Did the world's wave wait for thousands of millions of years until a single-living creature appeared? Or did it have to wait a while with a PhD for some better-qualified system? If the theory was anything But the highly ideal applies to laboratory operations, so are we not obligated to assume that more or less measurement-like 'processes are running more or less all the time, almost everywhere. Don't we have jumps all the time?

The first charge against 'measurement' in the fundamental axioms of quantum mechanics is that it anchors the divisions divided into 'systems' and 'systems' of the world. A second allegation is that the term is loaded with meaning from everyday life, meaning that is completely inappropriate in a quantum context. When it is said that something has been 'measured', it is not difficult to think of the result because some already existing property of the object in question is cited. This is in defiance of Bohr's insistence that quantum phenomena comprise the system, as well as the system, essentially. If this were not the case, how can we understand, for example, the measure of a component of ular angular momentum '… in an arbitrarily chosen direction… yielding a discrete set of values? When one forgets the role of the instrument, as the word 'measure' makes all the most possible, then a simple logic disappoints ... hence 'quantum logic'. When one remembers the role of tantra, simple logic is fine.

In other contexts, physicists have been able to take words from common language and have been used as technical words with no major damage. Take for example the 'weirdness', the 'attraction', and the 'beauty' of elementary particle physics. No one is taken from this 'talk baby talk' ... does it happen with 'measurement'. But in fact, the term has such a detrimental effect on discussion, I think it should now be completely banned in quantum mechanics. "

Js Bell, against "measurement"

Is it not clear what we have to do with small particles on the screen? And is it not clear, from diffraction and interference patterns, that the motion of the particle is guided by a wave? De Broglie showed in detail how the speed of a particle, passing through just one of two holes in the screen, can be affected by the waves propagating through both holes. And therefore influenced that the particle does not go where the waves cancel out, but attract where they cooperate. This idea seems so natural and simple to me, to solve the wave-particle dilemma in such a clear and general way, that it is a great mystery to me that it was generally ignored. "

Js Bell, Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics

"... the only ideas we should consider in physics are position observations if only the position of the instrument points. This is a great feature of the De Broglie-Bohm picture to force us to consider this fact. If If you make axioms rather than definitions and theorems about "measurement" of something else, you make redundancy and risk inconsistencies. "

Js Bell, Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics

But, again, we are confronted with the notion of a "fixed background". What if nature itself changes in ways that are sometimes bound to confuse knowledge? The very changes of nature, as a system, then, can be called "supernatural" or "miraculous".

In a way, it is the development of science. A law of nature is proposed or accepted. An event occurs or is observed that is not described or anticipated by it. It is, by definition, a violation of suggested or accepted law, which is thus wrong. Subsequently and consequently, the laws of nature have been completely revised or rewritten to reflect and contain this extraordinary phenomenon. Result: Hume's consolation distinction between "paranormal" and "miraculous" events remains intact (being ruled later).

Paranormal events can be compared to past experience - miraculous events have some supernatural interference with ordinary things ("wonder" in biblical terms). It is by confronting the paranormal and eliminating its "unusual" or "supernatural" characteristics that science advances as a miraculous activity. This, of course, is not the scene of choice of David Diction (his book, "The Fabric of Reality").

Back to the last phase of this life cycle, until Ossification. Discipline decreases and following the "mental" transitional phase, it sinks into a paralyzed state characterized by the following:

All practical and technical aspects of the dying discipline are preserved and continue to be used. Gradually the conceptual and theoretical underpinnings disappear or are replaced by the principles and postulates of a new discipline - but how inventions, processes, and practical information do not evaporate. They join the new discipline, and over time, are mistakenly attributed to it, marking it as the legitimate heir to the now flawed, erstwhile discipline.

The practitioners of the old discipline define themselves to imitate and replicate various aspects of the old discipline, primarily its intellectual property (writing, inventions, other theoretical content). This replication does not lead to the creation of new knowledge or even the spread of the old. This is a confusing process, limited to the shrinking scope of the initial. Specialized institutions handle the rehabilitation of materials related to the old discipline, their processing, and duplication. Institutions related to dead discipline are often funded and supported by the state, which is always an agent of protection, protection, and conformity.

Thus, the creative-evolutionary dimension of the now-dead discipline has ended. There are no new paradigms or revolutions. Boycott and replication of prescribed articles become major activities. Formalities are not subject to scrutiny and laws assume eternal, immutable, quality.

All the activities of obeying the old discipline become rituals. The old discipline itself becomes a pillar of extinct power structures and, as such, is condemned and supported by them. The practitioners of the old discipline synergistically collaborate with the powers: industrial base, military complex, political elite, in intellectual vogue. Institutionally constitutes essentially a (mostly bureaucratic) hierarchy.

Emerging ritual destroyers serve the purpose of diverting attention from "forbidden" thinking. These rigid ceremonies are reminiscent of obsessive-compulsive disorders in individuals who engage in ritualistic behavior patterns to defend "wrong" or "corrupt" thoughts.

Practitioners of the old discipline seek to cement the power of its "pastors". A ritual is a special form of knowledge that can only be attained by initiation ("rites of passage"). The position of someone in the hierarchy of dead discipline is not the result of an objectively quantitative variable or a decision on merit. This is the result of other conversations related to politics and power.

The need to ensure conformity leads to theistic theorization and the establishment of enforcement mechanisms. Dissidents are subjected to social and economic restrictions. They pre-transmit, harass, imprison, harass themselves, their works not missing or published, ridiculed, and so on.

This is really the victory of the text over the human soul. At this late stage of the life cycle, members of the older discipline community are unaware of the root causes and the reasons for their following. Why was discipline developed in the first place? The original riddles, questions, and questions faced and dealt with. There are forces behind the long-standing discipline. Its cold ashes are texts and their preservation is an expression of longing and desire for things of the past.

The vacuum left by the absence of positive emotions is filled with negative ones. Discipline and his disciples become phobic, paranoid, defensive, and a flawed reality test. Devoid of the ability to generate new, engaging content, the old discipline resolves to inspire by the manipulation of negative emotions. People are frightened, threatened, hersed, Kajol is portrayed. The world is depicted in an apocalyptic palette ruled by irrationality, chaotic, chaotic, dangerous, or even deadly. Only the old discipline stands between its followers and the apocalypse.

New, emerging themes are presented as Heritage, Fringe Lunacies, which is inconsistent, reactionary, and bound to bring humanity back to some dark ages. It is an inter-disciplinary or inter-paradigm conflict. It follows the psychotic phase. The old discipline favors some transcendental entity (God, Satan, or the wise observer in the Copenhagen interpretation of the formalism of quantum mechanics). In this sense, die discipline is already psychological and meets the test of reality. It develops ambassadorial aspirations and is inspired by a missionary zeal and enthusiasm. The fight against new ideas and principles is bloody and ruthless and every possible tool is employed.

But very important features of the old nomenclature lie in the old discipline. It is based on ritual initiation and preservation. It depends on bullying. The number of believers needs more "churches" and supports them repressive recruitment tactics. Emerging discipline wins by default. Even in the beginning, those who stand out the most to lose, eventually abandon the old discipline. Their faith settles when confronted with the prevalence of true value, explanatory and predictive powers, and emerging discipline.

This is, in fact, the main presenting symptom, the distinct identity of paralyzed older subjects. They deny reality. They are mere belief systems, myths. They require suspension of judgment and mistrust, the voluntary limitation of one's search for truth and beauty, the agreement to leave the swathes of the map in a state of "terra incognita". This reductionism, this schizoid avoidance, the support of physicalism, and parochial right symbolizes the beginning of the end.

Previous article
Next article

Leave Comments

Post a Comment

Ads Atas Artikel

Ads Tengah Artikel 1

Ads Tengah Artikel 2

Ads Bawah Artikel