haselhurst
03-19-2005, 08:47 PM
Hello everyone,
This is my first post here - hope it is OK.
I am very much into philosophy physics and metaphysics so i hope it is OK to post on these subjects.
But i think we share a common love of books, and their great power to bring to life beautiful minds from the past.
My partner Karene :banana: will join here soon, as she is more into general literature (I tend to mainly read philosophy).
Anyway, just a quick hello, think your forum is a great idea.
Geoff
PS - A few quotes for you that are relevant to my interests.
(Max Planck) A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.
When forced to summarize the general theory of relativity in one sentence:
Time and space and gravitation have no separate existence from matter. ....
Physical objects are not in space, but these objects are spatially extended (as fields). In this way the concept 'empty space' loses its meaning. ... The field thus becomes an irreducible element of physical description, irreducible in the same sense as the concept of matter (particles) in the theory of Newton. ... The physical reality of space is represented by a field whose components are continuous functions of four independent variables - the co-ordinates of space and time. Since the theory of general relatively implies the representation of physical reality by a continuous field, the concept of particles or material points cannot play a fundament part, nor can the concept of motion. The particle can only appear as a limited region in space in which the field strength or the energy density are particularly high. (Albert Einstein, Metaphysics of Relativity, 1950)
(Erwin Schrodinger) What we observe as material bodies and forces are nothing but shapes and variations in the structure of space. Particles are just schaumkommen (appearances). ... Let me say at the outset, that in this discourse, I am opposing not a few special statements of quantum mechanics held today (1950s), I am opposing as it were the whole of it, I am opposing its basic views that have been shaped 25 years ago, when Max Born put forward his probability interpretation, which was accepted by almost everybody. ... I don't like it, and I'm sorry I ever had anything to do with it.
(David Bohm, Wholeness and the Implicate Order, 1980) The notion that all these fragments is separately existent is evidently an illusion, and this illusion cannot do other than lead to endless conflict and confusion. Indeed, the attempt to live according to the notion that the fragments are really separate is, in essence, what has led to the growing series of extremely urgent crises that is confronting us today.
(Lee Smolin, 1997) A successful unification of quantum theory and relativity would necessarily be a theory of the universe as a whole. It would tell us, as Aristotle and Newton did before, what space and time are, what the cosmos is, what things are made of, and what kind of laws those things obey. Such a theory will bring about a radical shift - a revolution - in our understanding of what nature is. It must also have wide repercussions, and will likely bring about, or contribute to, a shift in our understanding of ourselves and our relationship to the rest of the universe.
This is my first post here - hope it is OK.
I am very much into philosophy physics and metaphysics so i hope it is OK to post on these subjects.
But i think we share a common love of books, and their great power to bring to life beautiful minds from the past.
My partner Karene :banana: will join here soon, as she is more into general literature (I tend to mainly read philosophy).
Anyway, just a quick hello, think your forum is a great idea.
Geoff
PS - A few quotes for you that are relevant to my interests.
(Max Planck) A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.
When forced to summarize the general theory of relativity in one sentence:
Time and space and gravitation have no separate existence from matter. ....
Physical objects are not in space, but these objects are spatially extended (as fields). In this way the concept 'empty space' loses its meaning. ... The field thus becomes an irreducible element of physical description, irreducible in the same sense as the concept of matter (particles) in the theory of Newton. ... The physical reality of space is represented by a field whose components are continuous functions of four independent variables - the co-ordinates of space and time. Since the theory of general relatively implies the representation of physical reality by a continuous field, the concept of particles or material points cannot play a fundament part, nor can the concept of motion. The particle can only appear as a limited region in space in which the field strength or the energy density are particularly high. (Albert Einstein, Metaphysics of Relativity, 1950)
(Erwin Schrodinger) What we observe as material bodies and forces are nothing but shapes and variations in the structure of space. Particles are just schaumkommen (appearances). ... Let me say at the outset, that in this discourse, I am opposing not a few special statements of quantum mechanics held today (1950s), I am opposing as it were the whole of it, I am opposing its basic views that have been shaped 25 years ago, when Max Born put forward his probability interpretation, which was accepted by almost everybody. ... I don't like it, and I'm sorry I ever had anything to do with it.
(David Bohm, Wholeness and the Implicate Order, 1980) The notion that all these fragments is separately existent is evidently an illusion, and this illusion cannot do other than lead to endless conflict and confusion. Indeed, the attempt to live according to the notion that the fragments are really separate is, in essence, what has led to the growing series of extremely urgent crises that is confronting us today.
(Lee Smolin, 1997) A successful unification of quantum theory and relativity would necessarily be a theory of the universe as a whole. It would tell us, as Aristotle and Newton did before, what space and time are, what the cosmos is, what things are made of, and what kind of laws those things obey. Such a theory will bring about a radical shift - a revolution - in our understanding of what nature is. It must also have wide repercussions, and will likely bring about, or contribute to, a shift in our understanding of ourselves and our relationship to the rest of the universe.