Thursday, December 4, 2014

552: Landing on an asteriod...

Why Science is Right is a complex statement, when looked at from a philosophical point of view. But sometimes I am inclined to say that science is breath taking.
For those who didn’t hear the news, yesterday there landed a small lander on a comet. Rosetta is a robotic space probe built and launched by the European Space Agency to perform a detailed study of comet 67P  with both an orbiter, and lander module Philae.
Rosetta was launched on 2 March 2004 on an Ariane 5 rocket. reached the comet on 6 August 2014, becoming the first spacecraft to orbit a comet. 
On 20 January 2014, Rosetta was taken out of a 31-month hibernation mode and continued towards the comet. It reached the comet on 6 August 2014, becoming the first spacecraft to orbit a comet.
Philae, the lander module, detached from Rosetta on 12 November 2014 at 08:35 UTC, with an estimated landing seven hours later. Confirmation of landing on Comet 67P reached Earth on 12 November 2014 at 16:03 UTC.
We are investigating scientific method here and so far we made a few points, that is, revealed a few basic assumptions of scientific method and rationality.
First there is the assumption, that at the basis of any scientific thinking is logic, in the West first formalized by Aristotle.
A second assumption was, that our reality is mathematical, calculable. This belief has emerged from the magical-metaphysical thinking of Pythagoras, where this aspect of reality originally had a kind of religious meaning.
A third assumption was that science should follow a specific method to create knowledge: the inductive - deductive procedures, as described by Aristotle.
And  now we launched an object into space that traveled millions of kilometers during more than ten years and drops a lander on a comet some 6 million kilometers away from here. All math was flawless. It landed.
The roots of this amazing achievement grow deep into history. To keep the picture clear, on the one hand we talk about scientific method,
and on the other hand we can talk about the content of science, to which the method is applied. In this case it is applied to our observations of the sky and the stars.
And thence you could say that this achievement is connected with a man like Galileo Galilei (1564 - 1642). He was convinced that the book of nature is written in the language of mathematics.
For this reason, he sought to restrict the scope of physics to assertions about “primary qualities”. Primary qualities are qualities essential to the very concept of body. 
Galileo believed that primary qualities such as shape, size, number, position, and “quantity of motion”, are objective properties of bodies, 
and that secondary qualities, such as colors, tastes, odors, and sounds, exist only in the mind of the perceiving subject.
By restricting the subject-matter of physics to primary qualities and their relations, Galileo excluded teleological explanations from the range of permissible discourse of physics.
According to Aristotle motion of an object was IN ORDER to reach its “natural place”, like the ground is for the falling stone.
To put it in a simple way, according to Aristotle things were explained with regard of their goal, like an acorn develops roots in order to become an oak, a stone falls in order to get to its natural place.
Galileo realized that he could not prove false an assertion such as “unsupported bodies move toward the Earth in order to reach their “natural place’.” 
But he also realized that this type of interpretation can be excluded from physics because it fails to “explain” the phenomena.
To say that the acorn develops roots in order to become an oak is not a scientific explanation for the fact that an acorn develops roots.
Galileo replaced Aristotles qualitatively differentiated world by a quantitatively differentiated  world. And thence science developed in such a way that we were able to calculate the whole journey of Rosetta in advance.
Thank you…. the floor is yours.. ^_^

The Discussion

[13:16] Bejiita Imako: And thus we see proof hat math is really natures language
[13:16] herman Bergson: Yes Bejiita even tho we do not understand the relation
[13:17] Gemma Cleanslate: amazing stuff
[13:17] herman Bergson: But I have some ideas about it.....
[13:17] Bejiita Imako: this experiment is a huge achievement for sure, i just hope they can get proper control of it and reposition it without it flying away
[13:17] Gemma Cleanslate: hope so
[13:17] Gemma Cleanslate: of fall off the comet
[13:18] Gemma Cleanslate: or*
[13:18] Corona Anatine: ok i would make the point about distinguishing sceicne and its application of technology/engineering
[13:18] Bejiita Imako: look forward to some good pics of that comet, as i see it seem not to be ice but more like rock
[13:18] Bejiita Imako: like an asteroid
[13:18] herman Bergson: Nice but not our issue today  Bejiita, but I agree with you :-))
[13:18] Bejiita Imako:
[13:18] Corona Anatine: sci and tech are closely related but not exactly the same
[13:18] Lizzy Pleides: we probably still do not know all mathematical rules to calculate everything
[13:18] Bejiita Imako: it show what science can do
[13:19] Bejiita Imako: true Lizzy
[13:19] Corona Anatine: well chaos and sensitivity to initial conditions determine that
[13:19] Bejiita Imako: probably not
[13:19] Corona Anatine: even our best rockets have a way to adjust slightly
[13:19] herman Bergson: No we don’t Lizzy, but your statement also seems to imply that eventually EVERYTHING is calcuable...
[13:19] Dings Digital: the idea is that the rejection of teleology (goals) led to the big explosion of scientific knowledge. science today works without teleology. though it took some time after Galileo for that idea to spread, I guess
[13:20] Bejiita Imako: ah
[13:20] Lizzy Pleides: that is the question herman
[13:20] herman Bergson: Indeed Dings....
[13:20] herman Bergson: But what is so interesting is , is the question why developed things like this...
[13:21] Corona Anatine: another point i have a small issue with is the list of 'secondary qualities - such as colour and taste odour and sounds
[13:21] Corona Anatine: those are quantifiable
[13:21] herman Bergson: take for instance this idea of primary and secundary qualities....
[13:21] Corona Anatine: sounds are qualities - music is not
[13:21] Corona Anatine: sound is primary music secondaty
[13:21] herman Bergson: Why did the brain make that distinction....?
[13:22] Corona Anatine: secondary qualities would be those with an esthetic element
[13:22] Corona Anatine: which is subjective
[13:22] herman Bergson: I think it is an indication for the fact that what we call science is the result of an evolutionary interaction between organism (homo sapiens) and environment
[13:22] Corona Anatine: can it be anything else?
[13:23] ZANICIA Chau: excuse me sorry late
[13:23] Corona Anatine: QED
[13:23] herman Bergson: Some people think so Corona...not me
[13:23] Gemma Cleanslate: what do others think
[13:23] Corona Anatine: well science is 'study of the world = environment'
[13:23] herman Bergson: Religious interpretations of reality...
[13:24] Gemma Cleanslate: hmmm
[13:24] Corona Anatine: it has nothing it can say about supernatural things - cos they cant be studied - and if they could be then they would not be supernatural
[13:24] Gemma Cleanslate: i am sure galileo would agree
[13:24] Bejiita Imako: yes
[13:24] Bejiita Imako: indeed
[13:25] Bejiita Imako: if you manage to see a ghost u can probably use science to define what a ghost really is
[13:25] Bejiita Imako: as example
[13:25] Dings Digital: so either color or love are somehow mathematical or they are not at all :)
[13:25] Corona Anatine: but do religions have an interpretation of reality - surely they only offer alternatives to its cause
[13:25] Gemma Cleanslate: they think so
[13:25] herman Bergson: I gotGood point Dings....!
[13:25] Bejiita Imako: colors at least, you can describe them in a computer as a color code
[13:26] Corona Anatine: well colour is a definable quality
[13:26] Bejiita Imako: as example
[13:26] Bejiita Imako: but love?
[13:26] Corona Anatine: as it is about absorbtion of specific wavelengths
[13:26] herman Bergson: Hold on plz and stick to the remark of Dings
[13:26] Corona Anatine: well first you would need to define love
[13:26] herman Bergson: Is love mathematical....?
[13:26] Bejiita Imako: love is a feeling
[13:26] Corona Anatine: it has been measured in terms of brain chemicals
[13:26] herman Bergson: I hear a similar remark....
[13:27] Corona Anatine: but its subjective application is not measurable
[13:27] Bejiita Imako: probably very hard to do
[13:27] Bejiita Imako: much more complicated
[13:27] herman Bergson: it was concerning social care....
[13:27] Corona Anatine: well partly because the term love is applied to several differne things
[13:27] Lizzy Pleides: first you have to define the term ”Love”
[13:28] Corona Anatine: exactly
[13:28] Bejiita Imako: yes
[13:28] ZANICIA Chau: emotion
[13:28] Bejiita Imako: that too
[13:28] herman Bergson: is social care  love for the other + time you spend on taking care of things for that person....
[13:28] Bejiita Imako: color is well color but love is a wider term
[13:28] Lizzy Pleides: hormone driven sometimes
[13:28] Corona Anatine: yes
[13:28] herman Bergson: or is social care just needing time for taking care of the other in a material sense
[13:29] Bejiita Imako: and positive feeling
[13:29] Corona Anatine: it could be said that love is an attraction for something that goes beyond the basic objective state
[13:30] herman Bergson: What here is the issue m, is that we have become to believe that everything is quantify able...
[13:30] Dings Digital: yes
[13:30] Corona Anatine: everything material is quantifiable
[13:30] herman Bergson: at least...that is what the economists try to make us believe
[13:30] Corona Anatine: its just that not everything is material
[13:30] Bejiita Imako: many things are but not everything, at least it is very hard to directly put a value on them
[13:30] herman Bergson: Which shows the relevance of Ding's remark
[13:30] Bejiita Imako: feelings is a such thing
[13:31] Lizzy Pleides: maybe everything is quantifiable but there are millions of aspects soemtimes
[13:31] ZANICIA Chau: this brings me back to the grey areas that I mentioned last time. They have to be recognized
[13:31] Bejiita Imako: that too Liz
[13:31] Bejiita Imako: id say
[13:31] Dings Digital: Lizzy, I was just thinking that
[13:31] herman Bergson: Yes Zan....
[13:31] Gemma Cleanslate: interesting
[13:31] Bejiita Imako: indeed
[13:32] herman Bergson: This space event is some boost for the idea that we can calculate everything.....which is a bad idea
[13:32] Corona Anatine: well the picture of the comet is a good illustration of these things - the image is quantifiable - but what you think of the achievement is not
[13:32] Ciska Riverstone: well - it did not all worked out as planned
[13:32] herman Bergson: In physics math event like this proves it...
[13:32] Ciska Riverstone: for that space event
[13:32] Bejiita Imako: ah
[13:33] herman Bergson: That were technical glitches Gemma ^_^
[13:33] Corona Anatine: well given the number of unknown factors its pretty good what they have acheived
[13:33] Ciska Riverstone: well it does not completely herman
[13:33] herman Bergson: But the main thing everything mathematical....
[13:33] Ciska Riverstone: otherwise the landing would have worked out as planned
[13:33] Ciska Riverstone: we need to see the reality
[13:34] Corona Anatine: amths can in theory be applied to everything - whether that would be a vlaid application is another matter
[13:34] ZANICIA Chau: I see it as millions of dollars of waste that could have been spent helping humans in need on THIS planet
[13:34] herman Bergson: And in fact we already have the answer to that question....NO :-)
[13:34] Ciska Riverstone: the truth is in the material world there are always influences which are not calculable - at least not yet
[13:35] herman Bergson: they never will , I would say Ciska...
[13:35] Corona Anatine: yes and millions are being spent on helping humans on this planet - unfortunately there are other agencies spending as much maoney on hindering
[13:35] ZANICIA Chau: yes
[13:35] ZANICIA Chau: imbalance
[13:35] herman Bergson: and the reason for that statement is that in so many areas we have to rely only on statistics...
[13:35] herman Bergson: which is just calculated guesswork :-)
[13:36] ZANICIA Chau: That also Herman
[13:36] Bejiita Imako: i use to say, there are lies, damn lies and statistics
[13:36] Ciska Riverstone: and the real question to solve is why that is
[13:36] Bejiita Imako:
[13:36] herman Bergson: No it wasn’t you
[13:36] ZANICIA Chau: lol
[13:36] Bejiita Imako: maybe heard it before
[13:36] Corona Anatine: nothing wrong with stats - its the use they are put to which constituteds the lies
[13:36] Bejiita Imako: its a classic here in Sweden
[13:36] Beertje Beaumont: sorry I have to go..rl is calling
[13:36] Bejiita Imako: yes if properly used and with correct data its good
[13:36] Beertje Beaumont: have a goodnight all
[13:36] Gemma Cleanslate: Bye, Bye   
[13:37] ZANICIA Chau: Goodnight
[13:37] Bejiita Imako: bye beertje
[13:37] herman Bergson: is a classic since the 19th century...
[13:37] Ciska Riverstone: sleep well folks and a good day for the day folks
[13:37] Bejiita Imako:
[13:37] Corona Anatine: sleep well ciska
[13:37] Bejiita Imako: bye Ciska
[13:37] herman Bergson: Wasnt it D'Israeli, a british prime minister who actually said it?
[13:37] Ciska Riverstone: night everyone
[13:37] ZANICIA Chau: you too Ciska
[13:38] Corona Anatine: what did disraleli say
[13:38] Bejiita Imako: well statistics are prone to misuse for sure
[13:38] herman Bergson: the statement about lies and statistics
[13:38] Corona Anatine: all scine cna be misused
[13:38] Corona Anatine: science can
[13:39] Corona Anatine: it is up to humanity to minimise that
[13:39] Bejiita Imako: hmm right now we have "scientists" that say you get cancer from that and that and other things that turn out not to be true
[13:39] Bejiita Imako: just to scare people
[13:39] Bejiita Imako: and create meaningless debates
[13:39] Corona Anatine: that is a very negative view
[13:39] Bejiita Imako: i read about such cases almost everyday
[13:39] herman Bergson: Ok back to our subject of today...
[13:39] Gemma Cleanslate: we talked about the first session
[13:40] Corona Anatine: the research that is done probably back their results
[13:40] Gemma Cleanslate: bad science
[13:40] Bejiita Imako: milk make u old, aspartam gives u cancer
[13:40] Bejiita Imako: such things
[13:40] Corona Anatine: the problem is that not all u humans have the same physiology
[13:40] herman Bergson: It was a pleasure to me to tell you that Galilei actually made this lander touch down on the comet :-)
[13:40] Bejiita Imako: YAY! (yay!)
[13:41] Bejiita Imako: cheers to him!
[13:41] Gemma Cleanslate: i believe itl ol
[13:41] Bejiita Imako: and to Rosetta!
[13:41] Corona Anatine: [even if it did bounce]
[13:41] herman Bergson: I hope you see the historical roots of this historical event...:-)
[13:41] Corona Anatine: oh yes for sure
[13:41] Bejiita Imako: ys
[13:41] bergfrau Apfelbaum: ty herman!!
[13:41] Bejiita Imako: would be nice
[13:41] Gemma Cleanslate: yes
[13:41] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥
[13:41] herman Bergson: Then thank youall again for your patient ears :-)
[13:41] Bejiita Imako:  \o/
[13:41] Bejiita Imako:    ||   Hoooo!
[13:41] Bejiita Imako:   / \
[13:41] herman Bergson: and your participation :-))
[13:42] ZANICIA Chau: Thank you Herman
[13:42] Corona Anatine: we have come a long way since the comet were seen as foretellign malignant events
[13:42] Bejiita Imako: nice Herman
[13:42] Gemma Cleanslate: off to a new LEA exhibit opening
[13:42] herman Bergson: Class dismissed..^_^
[13:42] Bejiita Imako: aaa ok
[13:42] Gemma Cleanslate: Bye, Bye   
[13:42] Lizzy Pleides: Thank you!
[13:42] herman Bergson: Have fun Gemma
[13:42] Bejiita Imako: hmm maybee i should check out
[13:42] Bejiita Imako: cu
[13:42] Bejiita Imako:
[13:42] Gemma Cleanslate: darn it is full
[13:42] bergfrau Apfelbaum: byebye Gemmaaa :o)
[13:42] Gemma Cleanslate GIGGLES!!
[13:42] Gemma Cleanslate: ...LOL...

45] Corona Anatine: ah right lik ein the sims 3 game

No comments:

Post a Comment