Wednesday, January 23, 2013

Does the Stopping Clock Read True at Every Instant We See It


 Does the Stopping Clock Read True at Every Instant We See It

L. Edgar Otto 

Jan.23, 2012  I put this reply a few posts back and include it here as a sample of the range of my current contemplations...And I had a couple of illustrations and a video to post but forgot to update them to my flash drive save the one above all around the general theme on the Rise of Life as a possible title  (or perhaps the Philosophy of the S-brane but that seems I have overused that theme lately...  Also in the simple pdf document sent to me I see a problem in how to make the notations in color cubes such that they do not return to the same orientation as in the bigamous groups or from a higher perspective the application of qualitative color from the container view in a sense results in a gain but not loss of the data and information where these views are unified...


 Mystical? not sure, philosophy yes... it is a simple (too simple really as if that can be defined by the suggestions given... such as equivalent topologies if transformed into each other- this may not be the case in string like spaces and I have recently worried about this as with all design systems that seem caught between triviality and contradiction- that is in my enumeration of the colored cubes.  This is still in a 'mystical or intuitive' state so even my sketches are not ready to post, if ever. For such symmetric considerations also seem caught between this sort of topology of dual or unitary sides in the actual drawing.  I also had to review the core philosophy (to that end in finding the best of arrangements of the way Oxford divides the issues) I am trying to devise a Periodic table of philosophy) for this is an all important issue of philosophy of science, Kuhn and Popper agree on the evolutionary approach of which Bergson does not make life force (one subject also I made some illustrations but is not ready for posting) a sort of inverted mechanistic view.  Yes, in a way there is a unity somewhere possible in the duality and monism and intuitively we do not necessarily find two negations a positive and so on by all the core logic.

But thank you for the presentation, it is not more abstract than the Plato like idea of forms as in string theory to which Aristotle rejected in his Lyceum.  Now Leibniz has deeper insight on the issue which escapes scientists and philosophers even today- the solution I imagine has to do with the discernible of indiscernible or other questions of identity, especially in matters of space and time.   But I am still taking in data to advance up to this which in an abductive non-necessary philosophy we may or may not be able to distinguish the indistinguishable- but there are methods that seem to where they apply across the whole area of philosophy and scientific methods. But I do not see it only as a matter of linguistics and say parallels or the nature of relations or not between such identities.  I am not sure in such matters one gets it or one does not, nor if this too is a wider generalization to which we might do well to apply to our advanced modern science at least in the questions we ask and the entities of which we seek.

Thank You for reading...
L. Edgar Otto


* * * * * 
video




No comments:

Post a Comment