Heidegger

Cologne 10-Nov-2007

GEVANS613 at aol.com schrieb Fri, 9 Nov 2007 13:21:03 EST:

> In a message dated 09/11/2007 10:50:16 GMT Standard Time,
> jPolanik at nc.rr.com writes: Dr. Fallacia:No. But we can only “see”
> electrons AS the abstract semi-integer solutions to a second-order
> partial differential equation; that is their IDEA which also exists
> within this mathematical casting of being– just as we can only see a
> being as something through the IDEA of something. The IDEA is not a
> subjective “idea” in our tiny little heads, nor is it “objectively”
> out there in the world, but is subject-object, i. e. in between in the
> ONTOLOGICAL DIFFERENCE. And that is the great deficiency of thinking
> in the modern age — that it moves obliviously back and forth between
> subject and object, remaining always clueless about what is in
> between. Jud: Ideas don’t exist You are living in a fantasy world like
> all Heideggerian head-bangers.

> Richard Sansom: (Who worked all of his life as a professional
> mathematician for one of USA’s biggest Aircraft manufacturers
> writes:Two math degrees – I am impressed. More impressive still
> would be a degree or two in [post-Newtonian] physics. The reality or
> existence of atoms, the macro-constituent of all matter, was suggested
> by Democritus, further suggested by Bernoulli, then Dalton, then
> Rutherford, then Bohr and it was not until at the University of
> Heidelberg in 1980 that an actual photograph of an atom established
> once and for all their existence. Mathematical equations had nothing
> to do with it – Maxwells or anyone’s. It is now commonplace to
> produce such photos of atoms. Mathematical equations prove nothing
> regarding the existence of anything. If they *prove* anything it is
> the consistency of rule-following symbolism. The proof of the pudding
> is in the sensory connection with phenomenon – including that
> provided by surrogate technological tools, such as x-ray
> crystallography and the electron microscope, etc.Regards,Richard
> Sansom

ME: What Richard Sanson with his “proof of the pudding” British
Empiricism says here does not contradict what I say above. It just
misses the point. It would be impossible to even conceive of the
“surrogate technological tools, such as x-ray crystallography and the
electron microscope, etc.”, let alone construct them, without the IDEA
of an atom, electron, etc, i.e. without the entire complex of equations
through which modern mathematical physics FORMulates its IDEAs (cf.
Plato’s so-called Theory of Forms). These entities are constructed and
appear in accordance with a mathematical theory, e.g. the Schrödinger
equation which (partially) determines what a (e.g. hydrogen) electron IS
AS (the apophantic AS) a wave function.

The insipid mention of Demokritos is a faint reminder that MATTER is an
IDEA, i.e. that what matter IS cannot be separated from AS what it shows
itself to the mind’s eye. Peering into an electron microscope to “look”
at an atom or whatever is nothing other than looking through the IDEAs
through which an atom shapes up and shows itself AS a being.

Just as, in itself, a mathematical equation proves nothing, neither does
the “actual photograph of an atom” (according to the maxim, Seeing is
believing!), in itself, prove anything at all. That is merely empiricist
naivity in full bloom. (Even Anglo-Saxon philosophy of science is not as
naive as this.) The photo is nothing at all without the IDEA of what it
shows. As usual, the idea, the ONTOLOGICAL DIFFERENCE in between, is
overlooked. But that’s the way modern science thinks — without
thinking. It naively “thinks” it has nailed reality with its
theoretico-mathematical rigour and experimental precision. But truth has
always already slipped through its fingers.

> Jud:An Electron is a negatively charged particle (a body having finite
> mass and internal structure but negligible dimensions) found in an
> atom. Electrons, along with neutrons and protons, comprise the basic
> building blocks of all atoms. The electrons form the outer layer or
> layers of an atom, while the neutrons and protons make up the nucleus,
> or core, of the atom.

ME: This is physics for kindergarten. For over two centuries a debate
has been underway over whether an electron is a particle or a wave, of
course, in terms of the naive ontology within which modern physics
operates. Both Aristotle and Hegel, for instance, have much to say about
the dual nature of things — i.e. about discreteness and continuity –,
but today that is beyond the horizon of what modern science can think.
It has become so enamoured with its own success that it arrogantly
overlooks the ontological foundations on which it rests.

_-_-_-_-_-_-_- artefact text and translation _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- made by art _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ http://www.webcom.com/artefact/ _-_-_-_- artefact at t-online.de _-_
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Dr Michael Eldred -_-_-
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_

> Electrons, neutrons, and protons are elementary particles—that is,
> they are among the smallest parts of matter that scientists can
> isolate. The electron carries a negative electric charge of –1.602 x
> 10-19 coulomb and has a mass of 9.109 x
> 10-31 kg. See also Atom.Electrons are responsible for many important
> physical phenomena, such as electricity and light, and for physical
> and chemical properties of matter. Electrons form electric currents by
> flowing in a stream and carrying their negative charge with them. All
> electrical devices, from flashlights to computers, depend on the
> movement of electrons. Electrons also are involved in creating light.
> The electrons in the outer layers of the atom sometimes lose energy,
> emitting the energy in the form of light. Because electrons form the
> outer layers of atoms, they are also responsible for many of the
> physical and chemical properties of the chemical elements. Electrons
> help determine how atoms of an element behave with respect to each
> other and how they react with atoms of other elements. See also
> Chemistry.II Electrons are Elementary ParticlesThe electron is one of
> the most fundamental and most important of elementary particles. The
> electron is also one of the few elementary particles that is stable,
> meaning it can exist by itself for a long period of time. Most other
> elementary particles can exist independently for only a fraction of a
> second.Electrons are among the smallest of all elementary particles
> and have no detectable shape or structure. At the same time, they do
> have a property that scientists can measure called spin, or intrinsic
> angular momentum. An electron’s spin makes it act as a tiny magnet.
> Electrons can spin clockwise or counterclockwise. MSN Encarta You need
> to ask your partner to buy you a beginner’s book in physics or do a
> Heidegger and sneak off somewhere for *a rest cure.*Tell them [the
> ones in the white coats] not to bother to switch on the light or the
> electric heater in your cell, because you believe the wires are full
> of mathematical numbers. Your strait-jacket should prove quite
> warming [according to Heidegger that is] and with the cell being
> padded too…Regards,

Posted on Sunday, November 11th, 2007 at 4:40 pm
comment | rss 2.0 | trackback