Karthikeyan > Recent Status Updates

information as replicators
knowledge as information that survives in a given environment
link between biological evolution and creation of knowledge
copiable, fallibilism, retrodicting my lady likes conjures words

so i see counterfactuals as a way to see things and not as a distinct philosophy/theory that is disjoint from existing factual theories

engineering, not theorizing is the best proof of scientific realism
borrowing Marx's ideology: the point is not to understand but to change. quite iffy.

Francis Bacon surprisingly has a view that matches mine.
Bacon - exp. are sometimes are decisive on competing theories, in contrast with modern view where it is considered to be decisive
detailed history of michelson-morley (MM) exp. It's not one exp. A series of experiments 1881-1935
MM was a degenerating research programme by Lakatos's definition

Van Frassen, measurement as continuation of theory
Cavendish's measurement of G did not advance gravity
P Duhem - constants of nature as artifacts of mathematics
Popper - measurements to test theories
Kuhn - measurements accumulate anomalies that guide research even during crises

creation of phenomena
difference between phenomena and effect
phenomena involves just observing and not intervening
while effect seem to involve intervening and repeatability
phenomena are often created by articulation of theories. example: josephson effect which only came to be observable after the theory articulation

theory <=> speculation
calculation => Kuhn's articulation (both theory and exp) in normal science => mathematical alteration of a speculation to bring it closer to the world
calculation => semantic bridge between theory and observation
calculation <=> model
approximation is an example of model
approx can be away from and towards the truth
Cartwright - theory has no truth. approx do

are we seeing with/through a microscope (mu)
Ernst Abbe - works on resolution of mu by understanding the physics of diffraction
mu maps interaction of constituent stuffs. could be based light, electrons or anything
the confidence in the reality of the observed comes when you observe identical maps using different physics systems, combined with understanding
theory is needed to build a mu, not for using it

Trying to reduce observation to language. Talk about the way we talk about obs, and not obs itself
grover maxwell denies the distinction between theory and obs, as it's often a limitation in tech.
obs != exp
feyerabend: obs is theory loaded
sometimes the lack of theory encourages more obs. heat radiation and colours in Herschel's case
shapere: theory loaded obs to understand smthg else that is independant

theory does not have precede exp
glorification of theory over exp. originated from class differences dating back to greeks
interesting stories of Ampere being the Newton of electricity
steam engine history: Newcomen, Watt, Trevithick and Sadi Carnot

realism as representation (rep)
people make reps. reps define humans.
in contra with humans rationals, rationality is linguistic. language is a product of boredom. indexical language at first, only then descriptive
rep before reality. judging of reps -> reality
no truth in physics, only a barrage of instructive reps
transition to reality as intervention
real => what can be used to intervene and what can affect us

Lakatos's disagrees with Kuhn's qualification of science as mob mentality

research programme: progressive and degenerating one

Objective knowledge resides in 3rd world of reality: 1st is actual reality, 2nd is a part of 1st is the world of consciousness and the 3rd is part of 2nd that can be put in words

Lakotos rationality doesn't really give a strategy to appraise theories. Feyerabend being its colourful critic

the most difficult chapter to follow so far
metaphysical realism (external): correspondence between words and external things vs internal realism: objects makes sense only within a theory
transcendentalism : through human mind
Kant's transcendental idealism (existence) <=> empirical realism
Kuhn's and Putnam's transcendental nominalism (classification)

Putnam defined meaning on 4 notions : syntactic (grammar), semantic (category), stereotype, reference and extension

The reference-extension inclusion allows two competing, successive theories differ by stereotype, but maintain the same reference, allowing comparison, circumventing Kuhn's meaning-incommensurability

Doesn't apply to branching of meaning, meaning of non-real entities

Incommensurability
Meaning no common measure. highest common divisor concept in Greek

Three forms of incommensurability
Topic, dissociation and meaning commensurability

Meaning incommensurability is the one most people focus as it received the most resistance and it's the most novel.

Daudeley shapere - enough commonality exists to make comparisons possible. Such are done without invoking meaning.

pragmatism:

replacement of truth by method

2 branches.

peirce: truth as table conclusions reached by a community
putnam: both different reasons and conclusions accumulate and converge

james, dewey, rorty: whatever answers to present needs
no stable conclusions. no notion more/less reasonable
instrumentalism

positivism denies causality while pragmatism accepts it as long as it's useful

original positivism p and logical positivism lp of the Vienna circle
p's six ingredients
Comte coined term p. Had links to french revolution Condorcet

Smart's materialism and Nancy Cartwright's causalism
Both care about the entity realism.

Interesting: regards flux lines I am more of a materialist than causalist.

Materialist's is for building while it is for causing for causalists

Millikan exp for e charge. similar exp to detect the charge of quarks
Realism as a movement and not a doctrine: different forms of realism: literary, artistic and then scientific
realism about entities (real) and theory (truth) are independent from one another
3 ingredients of sc. realism: ontological, causal, epistemological by newton smith
realism != materialism, forces don't come into the latter

separation of reason and reality

Carnap-Popper view in postivism. Former based things on induction and verification while the latter based things on deduction and falsifiability.

Both insufficient as read in Adam Becker's book. Confirmation and falsification makes sense only with an assumed context.

a good summary of Kuhn's work. More or less the forward he wrote for Structure.

Book will focus on reality.

how personalities and human biases shape scientific practice, paradigms

Everett's multiverse found support from cosmology: inflation and string theory both insisted on multiverse

remaining problem's with Everett's interpretation: role of probability, unfalsifiability

a case against falsifiability is provided

makes me want to look for jobs in quantum foundations

recognition of Bell's work and its practical implications in cryptography.

spontaneous collapse to explain wave function collapse. wf collapses spontaneously randomly and seem to happen more likely when the wf is entangled with a lot of particles, like during measurement. Also explains why macroscopic systems do not present superposition states

Works of John Clauser, Abner Shimony on exp. of Bell's inequality. Dieter Zeh's rediscovery, improvement of multiverse interpretation and the coinage of the term decoherence. Alain Aspect's refinement of CHSH exp.

Varenna summer school - woodstock of quantum foundation dissidents. Epistemological letters their medium to discuss and refine ideas.

Book's opening quote makes much more sense now with Aspect's story.

positivism's death initiated by Kuhn

The setting of this paradigm shift: Bohm's interpretation is disparaged, falsely assuming validity of Neumann's proof, Bell's inequality is stuck in editorial limbo, Ervett's multiverse is not even in the radar.

Positivism seem have taken a hydra like existence, nebulous, unclear an din many forms. Instrumentalism, operationalism, logical positivism etc...

John Bell's inequality.

Didn't know that he worked with a simplified version of EPR paper, introduced by Bohm. Bohm sounds more and more like an unsung hero at this point

Hugh Evrett's multiworld interpretation of quantum physics.

Universal wave function for the entire world. This concept is not insisted as much as the branching of universes in textbooks for laity

Science doesn't enforce freedom of speech to be honest. It's all running on a "attention-seeking" behaviour that Evrett was not interested in

Bohm's interpretation of quantum physics.

Particle waves surfing on top of pilot waves. It's this interpretation, that suggested even classical big objects possess quantum nature to it, though minuscule to be observed.

is de Broglie wavelength wrongly named after?

Pity Bohm's interpretation is not taught in any current curriculum. Hard to digest such ostracisation happened recently.

Copenhagen interpretation, supported by Bohr, Heisenberg, Jordan, did not have a united front.

Bohr looks more and more like a charlatan.

Heisenberg's total lack of character at the face of defeat in the atomic bomb race.

Migration of scientist mecca due to the war encouraged the positivistic nature of quantum physics.

Company mindset is not compatible for fundamental questions in science.