Re Is Science Hitting a Wall - it's not just about science

["Dave Farber" <farber () gmail com>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Ed Gerck, Ph.D." <egerck () gmail com>
> Date: April 8, 2018 at 4:47:57 PM EDT
> To: David Farber <dave () farber net>
> Subject: Re: [IP] Re Is Science Hitting a Wall - it's not just about science
>
> [Dave: for IP, with your consideration]
>
> IPers,
>
> I agree with Bob Frankston, and expand. There is much resistance today, mainly political but also technical, to 
> follow what science leads to, and that includes diligence time and current impunity, as much as access to silos.
>
> A fraud became a sale, as we see in car theft, where the victim buys a new car while the stolen one continues to be 
> serviced. Or, in cybersecurity, where a card fraud or a private record does not go unpaid, it generates profits 
> covered by insurance, socialized, and ads that target the victim as we see in Facebook.
>
> But, in science and technology, we should follow the science and tech, not the history of the science, nor the still 
> successful history of turning a fraud into sale, in IT and low-key car sales, or throwing money at a problem that 
> depends also group evolution.
>
> Where we see "hunches" in science, we should look for experiments, to confirm. Newton's third law was based on his 
> time's metaphysics, which also led him to postulate his notion of objective, immutable, time. Both have become a 
> burden in our intuition, making it difficult to accept Special Relaivity and simple dynamics -- like the example 
> cited in 
> https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_Newtons_Third_Law_a_misconception_A_metaphysical_dogma#view=5ab66dc5dc332d8dff017060.
>  This example shows that Newton's third law does not work in classical mechanics.
>
> Therefore, it is not that one should reject metaphysics or metamathematical arguments, but that one should pass them 
> through the sieve of experimentation, also in mathematical theorems and proofs, otherwise we may be carrying in 
> ourselves the wrong intuition how our world or our intellect works, such as the wrong calendar was carried for 500 
> years -- after a more correct one was known.
>
> If one keeps expecting an opposing reaction to every force, one may end up doing nothing, it would bring less 
> trouble, and cause less harm. The converse is true, as history of science also says, not just current physics. There 
> is no place to keep Newton's third law in the books of physics, or to base current calculations on it.
>
> The same happens with the, still economically successful, notion that "a fraud is a sale". After Facebook, can one 
> still justify it? Can one claim ignorance, not now just a theory, but of facts?
>
> The current not so careful movement toward blockchain-panacea is also harboring a potential fraud to become a sale, 
> as the chain never ends in something durable, but on a reference that depends... on another reference, both mutable, 
> notwithstanding the apparent efforts, to the consumer.
>
> Cheers,
> Ed Gerck
>
> --
> Work during, before, and after any crisis, and your work shall keep you in peace.



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-aa268125
Unsubscribe Now: 
https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-32545cb4&post_id=20180408171722:38C6505A-3B72-11E8-96BB-8096D80D7E0E
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com