Re: [Fis] (no subject)

Folks,

   Loet Leydesdorff's remark:

>Order is no longer given ex ante, but constructed and emerging ex post.

reminds me of the contrast between a unified and a unifying theory of
anything. If I try hard to distinguish between the two exclusively in
third-person description in the present tense, I would end up with a
formidable difficulty. This is because any legible text written in
third-person description in the present tense must observe a unified
consistency both in syntactic and semantic integrations, thanks to
synthesis-a-priori (a la Kant). Everything has already been unified with
everything else there.

   The very basis of such a Kantian synthesis a priori is in the postulated
infinite extension of both space and time. When we wish to talk about
anything, it must be within a container of one form or another. The
greatness and the limitation of the classical thinking is in the invention
of the container of an infinite extension. Likewise, we can also think of a
container of a finite extension. This has been what quantum phenomena have
brought to us. The contrast between the inside and the outside of such a
finite container is made picturesque as referring to the distinction between
present progressive and present perfect mode of motion, thanks to Max
Planck. The distinction between light emission in progress and light
emission done is an empirical fact. What's more, the distinction remains
quite robust.

   The underlying situation is like this: Suppose here is a bucket full of
water. If we are interested in the motion of water in the bucket, the
equation of motion after Navier-Stokes will tell us the full story of the
motion when it is further supplemented with the detailed shape of the
bucket. The movement of water has been perfected and completed at the inner
wall of the bucket. So far, so good. However, the situation would turn out
totally unsettled when someone raises the devastating question of who in the
world has brought this bucket there. Curiously enough, what quantum
mechanics has empirically suggested to us is that water comes with its own
bucket.

   Perhaps, what the issue of information would urge us to ponder on may be,
among others, to squarely face up to the empirical phenomena of the
contained coming with the container, before its further theoretical
elaboration. Attention should be focused on the distinction between present
progressive and present perfect tense. This has been the first dream of the
New Year.

   Cheers,
   Koichiro Matsuno

_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
Received on Fri Jan 2 14:28:58 2004