........some find the subject a little hard going

[nature] [science] [dots] [misuse] [departure] [fictional] [nuts] ...back to main
(occasionally I add to this and other pages without checking older stuff for quality) 3/00 ph

It's nature...

Nature can be interpreted as globally deterministic because sufficiently narrow circumstances seem to completely determine every effect.   There are also important gaps in this finding.
  • Deterministic rules allow exceedingly small differences to sometimes be multiplied and have large effects,
  • It is readily observable that nature is locally, not remotely, organized.
  • For nature to be globally deterministic and local organized at the same time may seem incompatible, but it's only our minds that are lacking.   The way it works it that first things need to get organized and then they can be controlled.  If controlling one part determines the behavior of all the others, it is because they are organized that way.   Without the organization, there's no special influence to be had.   The old tools and concepts were (and are still) good at uncovering how things are organized and how we can take advantage of it, but tell us very little about how things get organized in the first place.   It's a separate problem.   To some degree, it means learning how to be interested in, and to watch things, that are a little out of control, and then to identify the locally opportunistic mechanisms that develop to bring about some order.  Once those have taken place things can then potentially be predicted and controlled.

    It's science...

    Scientific writing makes difficult reading. It's not just that science involves special terminology and complicated methods, its also that scientists have highly enriched sets of images that originate from direct observation of their physical subjects, things no one else may observe as closely, so it's can be hard to know what's being talked about.


    Finding continuous patterns of change over time is the main subject, and this means drawing curves. One of the most curious features of nature is that all apparent curves, when looked at closely, are made of 'dots', the ink on the page as well as the data and the physical subject it refers to, presenting a total discontinuity! Yet there is continuity, but not seamless like in mathematics, and whether there are connections in nature or not, only the connections between the dots, that we make, allow us to see it.

    the 'language'

    Speaking about a complicated scientific subject, to a broad interdisciplinary scientific audience, requires speaking quite precisely, but with fewer specialized terms than usual. On many of the subjects I address I don't know many of the technical terms myself, and would not help anyone by creating a number of my own to make the reading more difficult. Some parts of this subject would still benefit from developing specialized terminology but that is largely avoided in favor of using generalized terms and references to physical subjects. A simple glossary is perhaps becoming needed.

    Seems to depart from the scientific method?

    Just Sounds fictional?

    The central part of this work is a disciplined method of suggesting new hypotheses, displaying the patterns of nature clearly enough for us to form better questions about them. As a hypothesis generator the product is inherently a kind of fiction, something to stimulate the imagination.

    Still just sounds nuts?

    Then there's the more basic problem of the author's own occasional inconsistencies, errors in method and interpretation, and sometimes inappropriate characterization. The author is somewhat, but not fully, conversant in the fields addressed, and is inevitably prone to misusing some of the terms and glossing over some of the details to fill in the gaps.

    [nature] [science] [dots] [misuse] [departure] [fictional] [nuts] ...back to main
    top ...   e-mail