Re: [Fis] Realism

Dear Rafael,

I agree with you (and Kant ) - our knowledge of the universe is just a
partial knowledge. We experience the physical world with our physical
sensors, and within the conceptual framework of our (current) theories.
The same world might be for some other animal (say cephalopoda) very
much different - in terms of inputs and outputs as well as information
processing mechanisms, memory, reaction patterns... Who knows what
cephalopoda would say the "real world" looks like? Sciences (being
human) are very much defined by our own hardware and the social nature
of our (scientific) knowledge.

I suppose that majority of scientists know (and even work for and hope
for) that our current theories will be replaced by some new, different,
more general and in other respects better ones. No scientific theory is
"the definitive truth" about how things actually "really" are. They are
our best "truths" or our best conceptual tools for handling the complex
world we are part of.

You say:
/"This fundamental incoherence between our thoughts/theories and what
things *in themselves* (pace Kant) are, is what wakes us up and we
understand that we are partners with *another* and that *reality*
flourishes out of such an interactive *metabolism* even in its very
physical dimension."/
- and I agree completely.

What was called "objective" is "inter-subjective". Scientific theories
are the results of the collective effort of a scientific community
consisting in the exchange of information, experiment/theory
verification and reproduction, justification etc.

No single theory that I know can be ascribed to one human being in an
isolated direct contact with the Universe without any other qualified
humans accepting it. To my mind, science (and human knowledge in
general) is about the /interaction/ in the first place. That interaction
is the information exchange. That is why information (or computing as
information processing) is so important. That is the basic level we know
of, at which physical phenomena can be conceptualized. And that might be
considered as a reductionist view. Again, I think (grand) reductionism
is extremely good but it must eventually be combined with some kind of
constructivism, when we climb that staircase of increasing scales up again.

With best regards,
Gordana

Rafael Capurro wrote:
> Dear Gordana
>
> thanks for your comments. I have no problem with methodological
> reductionisms. Indeed, it is not possible to do science, I think, if
> we do not take a specific perspective on the basis of presuppositions
> that we do not question when we do *normal science*. What I called
> *declaration of faith* goes (sometimes) one step further and is
> affirmative with regard to the nature of *what is*. It is this kind of
> second order reductionism that we should be aware of. I mean, *aware
> of* in two directions *any* determination with regard to *what is*
> presupposes what George Spencer Brown calls the *unmarked space*.
>
> The *unmarked space" or what some philosophers also call
> the *indeterminacy of Being* concerns the possibility
> (methodologically and existentially) of going beyond what we
> necessarily think *it is* when we do science. Without it we would be
> prisoners of our own theories. I have developed this idea in this
> paper: http://www.capurro.de/oxford.html
>
> No question concerning what in former times was called *the existence
> of the outside world*. I am a realist *in this sense* just because the
> question itself is a petitio principii. But at the same time, the fact
> that we are *already* in the world and have no possibility of looking
> at it/at us *from the outside* is something that we should (could) not
> consider as negative, asking for a *solid foundation* (of our theories
> and existences). This is what metaphysics looks for and also comes out
> in unreflected *declarations of faith*.
>
> Any answer we get from nature seems to invite us to say: 'yes, this is
> *the* way things *are*' And so we tend to rest and be happy. Maybe we
> need also this kind of, Shakespeare would say, *comic relief*, we
> breathe deeply and say: ok, things are *just* this or that. No more,
> no less. But, h�las... This fundamental incoherence between our
> thoughts/theories and what things *in themselves* (pace Kant) are, is
> what wakes us up and we understand that we are partners with *another*
> and that *reality* flourishes out of such an interactive *metabolism*
> even in its very physical dimension.
>
> Then, *what is an atom?* or *what is a molecule?* and *what is the
> intertweening of our being* as a *product* and as a *partner* in this
> dynamic (=potential) process? I think that the strenght of the
> information paradigm, if we reflect it from this
> dialogical-informational perspective, is that it reflects this
> interactive dimension of reality construction. The alternative is the
> (Aristotelian) dynamism of *in-formation* of what is *already there*
> (potentially) striving for its pre-determined goal. If this is what
> *physics* is looking for, we can take profit of it too. No question.
>
> kind regards
>
> Rafael
>
>
> Prof. Dr. Rafael Capurro
> Hochschule der Medien (HdM) - Stuttgart Media University, Wolframstr.
> 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
> Private: Redtenbacherstr. 9, 76133 Karlsruhe, Germany
> E-Mail: rafael@capurro.de <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>;
> capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de <mailto:capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de>
> Voice Stuttgart: + 49 - 711 - 25706 - 182
> Voice private: + 49 - 721 - 98 22 9 - 22 (Fax: -21)
> Homepage: www.capurro.de <http://www.capurro.de>
> Homepage ICIE: http://icie.zkm.de
> Homepage IRIE: http://www.i-r-i-e.net
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Susana Perez Gomar <mailto:susanapg@adinet.com.uy>
> *To:* Rafael Capurro <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>
> *Sent:* Monday, June 26, 2006 5:54 PM
> *Subject:* Datos
>
> Estos datos �que tal?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Rafael Capurro <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>
> *To:* Susana Perez Gomar <mailto:susanapg@adinet.com.uy>
> *Sent:* Monday, June 26, 2006 5:12 AM
> *Subject:* Re: Fotos
>
> buen dia susanita,
>
> para evitar que el sitio de juan bautista devenga demasiado
> recargado
> he puesto la historia de nuestros abuelos y sus descendientes en
> un lugar separado:
> http://www.capurro.de/capurro_etchegaray.html
> de modo que Juan Bautista queda asi
> http://www.capurro.de/JBCapurro.html
>
> Te he puesto como co-autora del texto de papun y mami. Revisalo
> bien: me faltan datos (hijos de Eduardo por ej.) y tambien datos
> del casamiento (dia,anio), datos de la familia de mami: sus padres
> y hermanos. Tengo solo la foto de Tatita Etchegaray pero no de su
> madre ni de sus abuelos (por parte de madre y padre). Para
> comparar
> fijate en este sitio de mi abuela materna:
> http://www.capurro.de/ema_piaggio.html
>
> bueno, esto es todo por el momento. Anadi, ahora si, la foto
> con los bisnietos de mami...
>
> rafael
> Prof. Dr. Rafael Capurro
> Hochschule der Medien (HdM) - Stuttgart Media University,
> Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
> Private: Redtenbacherstr. 9, 76133 Karlsruhe, Germany
> E-Mail: rafael@capurro.de <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>;
> capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de <mailto:capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de>
> Voice Stuttgart: + 49 - 711 - 25706 - 182
> Voice private: + 49 - 721 - 98 22 9 - 22 (Fax: -21)
> Homepage: www.capurro.de <http://www.capurro.de>
> Homepage ICIE: http://icie.zkm.de
> Homepage IRIE: http://www.i-r-i-e.net
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Susana Perez Gomar <mailto:susanapg@adinet.com.uy>
> *To:* Rafael Capurro <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>
> *Sent:* Monday, June 26, 2006 12:56 AM
> *Subject:* Re: Fotos
>
> Eso es un imposible. Pero si piensas en esa generaci�n (
> ya muchos son casados ) que viene y se pueden ver y
> encontrar en una de esas ser�a lindo para ellos.�qu� te
> parece?.Como tu quieras.
> Est� espectacular!!!. las fotos quedaron impecables donde
> las pusistes.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Rafael Capurro <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>
> *To:* Susana Perez Gomar <mailto:susanapg@adinet.com.uy>
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 25, 2006 7:39 PM
> *Subject:* Re: Fotos
>
> date una vuelta por el sitio, creo que va quedando
> cada vez mejor. La foto de los primos es fantastica pero
> no se si ponerla porque implicaria explicar quien es
> quien!
> y esto es casi imposible, no?!
>
>
> Prof. Dr. Rafael Capurro
> Hochschule der Medien (HdM) - Stuttgart Media
> University, Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
> Private: Redtenbacherstr. 9, 76133 Karlsruhe, Germany
> E-Mail: rafael@capurro.de <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>;
> capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de <mailto:capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de>
> Voice Stuttgart: + 49 - 711 - 25706 - 182
> Voice private: + 49 - 721 - 98 22 9 - 22 (Fax: -21)
> Homepage: www.capurro.de <http://www.capurro.de>
> Homepage ICIE: http://icie.zkm.de
> Homepage IRIE: http://www.i-r-i-e.net
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Susana Perez Gomar
> <mailto:susanapg@adinet.com.uy>
> *To:* Rafael Capurro <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>
> *Sent:* Monday, June 26, 2006 12:28 AM
> *Subject:* Re: Fotos
>
> De esa foto no recuerdo.
> No tengo la menor idea sobre que va a pasar.
> �Qu� te pareci� la de los primos?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Rafael Capurro <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>
> *To:* Susana Perez Gomar
> <mailto:susanapg@adinet.com.uy>
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 25, 2006 7:21 PM
> *Subject:* Re: Fotos
>
> yo me acuerdo de una foto de papun y mami en
> la Pastoral
> tomando el desayuno (?) en la parte de atras
> de la casa
> sentado frente a una mesa redonda que era como
> el tronco
> de un arbol...
> tenes idea que va a pasar con el "material
> familiar" que
> seguramente tenia Lucho? (luego de la muerte
> de Raquel
> hace pocos dias)?
>
> Prof. Dr. Rafael Capurro
> Hochschule der Medien (HdM) - Stuttgart Media
> University, Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart,
> Germany
> Private: Redtenbacherstr. 9, 76133 Karlsruhe,
> Germany
> E-Mail: rafael@capurro.de
> <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>;
> capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de
> <mailto:capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de>
> Voice Stuttgart: + 49 - 711 - 25706 - 182
> Voice private: + 49 - 721 - 98 22 9 - 22 (Fax:
> -21)
> Homepage: www.capurro.de <http://www.capurro.de>
> Homepage ICIE: http://icie.zkm.de
> Homepage IRIE: http://www.i-r-i-e.net
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Susana Perez Gomar
> <mailto:susanapg@adinet.com.uy>
> *To:* Rafael Capurro
> <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 25, 2006 11:54 PM
> *Subject:* Re: Fotos
>
> Estoy haciendo un esfuerzo para adivinar
> quienes son.
> En la de arriba parece mam� y si hay otra
> persona no la llego a ver.
> En la de abajo a la derecha parece ser
> Mami y a su izquierda �podr�a ser Pap�n?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Rafael Capurro
> <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>
> *To:* Susana Perez Gomar
> <mailto:susanapg@adinet.com.uy>
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 25, 2006 6:42 PM
> *Subject:* Re: Fotos
>
> alguna foto de La Pastoral con Papun y
> mami seria lindo...
>
> Prof. Dr. Rafael Capurro
> Hochschule der Medien (HdM) -
> Stuttgart Media University,
> Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
> Private: Redtenbacherstr. 9, 76133
> Karlsruhe, Germany
> E-Mail: rafael@capurro.de
> <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>;
> capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de
> <mailto:capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de>
> Voice Stuttgart: + 49 - 711 - 25706 - 182
> Voice private: + 49 - 721 - 98 22 9 -
> 22 (Fax: -21)
> Homepage: www.capurro.de
> <http://www.capurro.de>
> Homepage ICIE: http://icie.zkm.de
> Homepage IRIE: http://www.i-r-i-e.net
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Susana Perez Gomar
> <mailto:susanapg@adinet.com.uy>
> *To:* Rafael Capurro
> <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 25, 2006 11:31 PM
> *Subject:* Re: Fotos
>
> Me hac�s reir de lo lindo!!!
> No te imaginas la fama que ten�a
> de un hombre enormemente generoso.
> �Quer�s fotos de La Pastoral?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Rafael Capurro
> <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>
> *To:* Susana Perez Gomar
> <mailto:susanapg@adinet.com.uy>
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 25, 2006
> 6:23 PM
> *Subject:* Re: Fotos
>
> a si, ya veo, Rafael Capurro
> Ruano, no dejo descendencia,
> como este otro Rafael Capurro
> Fonseca! debe de haber algo
> magico-malefico en este nombre
> y apellido. En el cementerio
> vi una placa que dice: Rafael
> Capurro. Me quede contento de
> ver que ya estoy bajo tierra!
>
> Prof. Dr. Rafael Capurro
> Hochschule der Medien (HdM) -
> Stuttgart Media University,
> Wolframstr. 32, 70191
> Stuttgart, Germany
> Private: Redtenbacherstr. 9,
> 76133 Karlsruhe, Germany
> E-Mail: rafael@capurro.de
> <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>;
> capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de
> <mailto:capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de>
> Voice Stuttgart: + 49 - 711 -
> 25706 - 182
> Voice private: + 49 - 721 - 98
> 22 9 - 22 (Fax: -21)
> Homepage: www.capurro.de
> <http://www.capurro.de>
> Homepage ICIE: http://icie.zkm.de
> Homepage IRIE:
> http://www.i-r-i-e.net
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Susana Perez Gomar
> <mailto:susanapg@adinet.com.uy>
>
> *To:* Rafael Capurro
> <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 25,
> 2006 11:01 PM
> *Subject:* Fotos
>
> Hermano de Pap�n (Dr.en
> medicina � gran hombre!)en
> la segunada vas a ver
> varios conocidos, el del
> centro es Pap�n.
>
> ----- Original Message
> -----
> *From:* Rafael Capurro
> <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>
>
> *To:* Susana Perez
> Gomar
> <mailto:susanapg@adinet.com.uy>
>
> *Sent:* Sunday, June
> 25, 2006 2:57 PM
> *Subject:* Re: Aclaraci�n
>
> buena idea, ya esta hecha!
>
> Prof. Dr. Rafael Capurro
> Hochschule der Medien
> (HdM) - Stuttgart
> Media University,
> Wolframstr. 32, 70191
> Stuttgart, Germany
> Private:
> Redtenbacherstr. 9,
> 76133 Karlsruhe, Germany
> E-Mail:
> rafael@capurro.de
> <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>;
> capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de
> <mailto:capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de>
> Voice Stuttgart: + 49
> - 711 - 25706 - 182
> Voice private: + 49 -
> 721 - 98 22 9 - 22
> (Fax: -21)
> Homepage:
> www.capurro.de
> <http://www.capurro.de>
> Homepage ICIE:
> http://icie.zkm.de
> Homepage IRIE:
> http://www.i-r-i-e.net
>
> ----- Original
> Message -----
> *From:* Susana
> Perez Gomar
> <mailto:susanapg@adinet.com.uy>
>
> *To:* Rafael
> Capurro
> <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>
>
> *Sent:* Sunday,
> June 25, 2006 7:03 PM
> *Subject:* Aclaraci�n
>
>
> Rafael le mostr� a
> Juacho y le parece
> mejor que pongas
> Susana Capurro*
> Etchegaray* as� se
> ve la relaci�n de
> abuela, madre y
> nieta. No s� si
> eso te complica.
> Le encant� lo que
> est�s haciendo,
> Te manda un abrazo.
>
> ----- Original
> Message -----
> *From:* Rafael
> Capurro
> <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>
>
> *To:* Susana
> Perez Gomar
> <mailto:susanapg@adinet.com.uy>
>
> *Sent:*
> Sunday, June
> 25, 2006 1:08 PM
> *Subject:* Re:
> Mas fotos
>
> estupendo,
> gracias.
> Sabes la
> direccion de
> la casa (calle
> etc.?)
>
> y quien es
> quien en la
> foto de la playa?
>
>
>
> Prof. Dr.
> Rafael Capurro
> Hochschule der
> Medien (HdM) -
> Stuttgart
> Media
> University,
> Wolframstr.
> 32, 70191
> Stuttgart, Germany
> Private:
> Redtenbacherstr.
> 9, 76133
> Karlsruhe, Germany
> E-Mail:
> rafael@capurro.de
> <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>;
> capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de
> <mailto:capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de>
> Voice
> Stuttgart: +
> 49 - 711 -
> 25706 - 182
> Voice private:
> + 49 - 721 -
> 98 22 9 - 22
> (Fax: -21)
> Homepage:
> www.capurro.de
> <http://www.capurro.de>
> Homepage ICIE:
> http://icie.zkm.de
> Homepage IRIE:
> http://www.i-r-i-e.net
>
> -----
> Original
> Message -----
> *From:*
> Susana
> Perez
> Gomar
> <mailto:susanapg@adinet.com.uy>
>
> *To:*
> Rafael
> Capurro
> <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>
>
> *Sent:*
> Sunday,
> June 25,
> 2006 6:00 PM
> *Subject:*
> Mas fotos
>
> Aqu� te
> mando m�s
> fotos por
> si te
> interesan.
> La de la
> playa es
> de 1934.
>
>
> Prof. Dr. Rafael Capurro
> Hochschule der Medien (HdM) - Stuttgart Media University, Wolframstr.
> 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
> Private: Redtenbacherstr. 9, 76133 Karlsruhe, Germany
> E-Mail: rafael@capurro.de <mailto:rafael@capurro.de>;
> capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de <mailto:capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de>
> Voice Stuttgart: + 49 - 711 - 25706 - 182
> Voice private: + 49 - 721 - 98 22 9 - 22 (Fax: -21)
> Homepage: www.capurro.de <http://www.capurro.de>
> Homepage ICIE: http://icie.zkm.de
> Homepage IRIE: http://www.i-r-i-e.net
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic <mailto:gordana.dodig-crnkovic@mdh.se>
> *To:* Rafael Capurro <mailto:capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de>
> *Cc:* FIS Mailing List <mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es>
> *Sent:* Monday, June 26, 2006 2:21 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [Fis] Realism
>
> Dear Rafael & Dear colleagues,
>
> Allow me to try to advocate reductionism. I know how unpopular it
> might be.
> Reductionism is an ideal of a physicist (and yes please, notice
> the important distinction made by Steven Weinberg between petty
> reductionism and grand reductionism!)
> http://www.nybooks.com/articles/article-preview?article_id=1785
> The ideal of grand reductionism is to find the most general
> underlying physical principles for the physical reality. What else
> would we expect of a physicist?
>
> I also believe that no reasonable physicist today believes that
> atoms can account /directly/ for all the diversity of this complex
> world, not even of the physical phenomena alone. But they make an
> enormous amount of sense at certain levels of abstraction.
>
> Lets consider "panatomism" - the claim that mater is made of atoms.
> Of course theory of atomic structure of matter can not help us to
> solve ethical problems of humanity. But it is very good to know
> that matter consists of atoms. There is a range of phenomena that
> atomic theory can account for and its very generality is an
> enormously powerful feature.
>
> I agree that in questions metaphysical, such as in the choice of
> the general framework of realism or anti-realism (Ontological?
> Epistemological? Is anti-realism synonymous with Platonism or with
> constructivism? - It is not always clear.)
>
> In any event the choice of metaphysical framework is nothing that
> you have scientific proof for, but some research communities (for
> good reasons I would say) prefer ontological realism (physical
> sciences are typical example), some communities tend towards
> Platonism (mathematicians are sometimes inclined towards this) -
> and I guess that what makes certain framework attractive is its
> intuitive appeal to the research community.
>
> Are scientist more qualified to impose their own frameworks (based
> on their own intuitions) within their research fields? I think
> they are.
> The same way we trust medical doctors when they make judgments of
> our complicated health state, the same way we may trust
> physicist's ontological realism. If they don't have the right
> intuition, who has?
>
> Of course, it is a question of intuition, not of knowledge, and it
> is worth to make that distinction - I agree.
>
> All the best,
> Gordana
> http://www.idt.mdh.se/personal/gdc/
>
>
> Rafael Capurro wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> declarations of faith are declaration of faith.
>> Nothing more, nothing less. They are self-contradictory in case
>> they are
>> supposed to be the truth about reality. In that case they are no
>> recongnized
>> as declarations of faith. The faith of a scientist that
>> acknowledges to be a
>> (materialist) realist is no less a faith than the one that
>> believes reality
>> is "just" numbers (or bits or...). The poverty of reductionisms
>> is that they
>> give the impression that in the long run we just need to make, as
>> in this
>> case, good physics and everything will be explained. This is not
>> very
>> realistic, in fact.
>> kind regards
>> Rafael
>>
>>
>> Prof. Dr. Rafael Capurro
>> Hochschule der Medien (HdM) - Stuttgart Media University,
>> Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
>> Private: Redtenbacherstr. 9, 76133 Karlsruhe, Germany
>> E-Mail: rafael@capurro.de; capurro@hdm-stuttgart.de
>> Voice Stuttgart: + 49 - 711 - 25706 - 182
>> Voice private: + 49 - 721 - 98 22 9 - 22 (Fax: -21)
>> Homepage: www.capurro.de
>> Homepage ICIE: http://icie.zkm.de
>> Homepage IRIE: http://www.i-r-i-e.net
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Devereux"
>> <dbar_x@cybermesa.com>
>> To: "FIS Mailing List" <fis@listas.unizar.es>
>> Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2006 8:58 PM
>> Subject: [Fis] Realism
>>
>>
>>> Dear Arne and colleagues,
>>>
>>> There is an essential reason, I believe, why nearly all physical
>>> scientists are realists. There would be no physical science
>>> without realism. Perhaps the most fundamental assumption upon
>>> which physical science depends is the conviction that all of us
>>> are imbedded in the same, objective physical reality.
>>> I understand that one cannot prove this deductively, but the
>>> inductive evidence seems, to most of us, to be overwhelming.
>>> From the very beginning of physical science, through to the
>>> present, all of our scientific accomplishments rely on a
>>> description of nature that is observer independent. We�ve
>>> incorporated Gallilean relativity into the fundament of
>>> classical physics. All the classical equations of motion are
>>> observer independent. Would there be anything at all left of the
>>> physical sciences if we discarded classical mechanics?
>>> It is exactly the consistency and usefulness of the physical
>>> sciences that argues, irrefutably, I believe, for the validity
>>> of the axioms upon which physical science depends. Statistical
>>> mechanics, hydrodynamics, electrodynamics, and others cannot
>>> stand without classical mechanics. So, we physical scientists
>>> must adamantly refuse to concede that because realism is not
>>> deductively derivable, it might not be correct.
>>> I note that Einstein built both his theories of relativity,
>>> special and general, on the postulate of observer independence.
>>> Should we throw out those extraordinarily valuable and
>>> consistent theories because we wish to debate the lack of a
>>> deductive argument for realism? I�m sure that quantum mechanics
>>> (which also employs classical mechanics via the Hamiltonian
>>> formalism, Poisson Brackets, etc.) does not imply observer
>>> dependence, though some eminent physicists, like Wigner and von
>>> Neumann, have read it that way.
>>> The accepted understanding of the wavefunction, Psi, was given
>>> in the early 1920s by Max Born. As you know, If we wish to
>>> calculate the probability for each possible measured value of
>>> the system we take the projection of the eigenfunction for that
>>> value on the wave function, then calculate the inner product
>>> with Psi*. That we are predicting a probability for a measured
>>> outcome does not, at all, imply that human consciousness plays
>>> any part in the measurement. In fact, as Hawking, Penrose, and
>>> so many other physicists have so carefully calculated, there is
>>> every reason to believe that quantum mechanics described the
>>> cosmos billions of years before any humans and their conscious
>>> minds existed.
>>> In general, measurement is information exchange between two
>>> separate physical objects. Neither object need be human, of
>>> course. The canonical model for a measurement that transfers one
>>> bit of information is the bi-level atom located along one arm of
>>> the Stern-Gerlach apparatus described in 1978 (Physics Reports)
>>> by Scully, Shea, and McCullen. When a spinning molecule collides
>>> with the bi-level atom, a single quantum of energy is
>>> transferred to the atom. This is a real, physical, energetic
>>> signal that carries information about the change in energy of
>>> the molecule to the atom. Since energy is always conserved, the
>>> energy jump in the detector atom always records the exact
>>> information about the change in energy of the molecule.
>>> One may, of course, still ask how human beings are able to
>>> observe properties of our shared physical reality. I�m convinced
>>> that at the most basic level of human percepta, more fundamental
>>> than learned, or perhaps innate, shapes and objects, we all look
>>> at the same pattern of minute color specks and see (and
>>> describe) the same specks. The key here is to look only for each
>>> speck of color, as one might do to a pointillist painting by
>>> Signac, say, ignoring any impression of physical objects that
>>> the artist may have portrayed. If necessary, scientists could
>>> employ such a basic technique to insure that the pattern which
>>> carries information about results of a measurement (like the
>>> face of an ammeter, for instance) really is observer
>>> independent. I�m convinced that there are no
>>> cultually-inculcated tendencies at this most basic level.
>>> Cordially,
>>>
>>> Michael Devereux
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> fis mailing list
>>> fis@listas.unizar.es
>>> http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> fis mailing list
>> fis@listas.unizar.es
>> http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
>

_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
Received on Tue Jun 27 13:58:32 2006