Reclusland

February 6, 2009

- The Middle Path -

ramblings —

  1. Very cool. Pictures like this turn up regularly in undergraduate science courses when one is trying to describe what a ‘fundamental particle’ looks like. Importantly, the jury is still out on the top two.

    At bottom, is the world analogue or digital? (Or is that an impossible dilemma on which we are to merely meditate? Or something entirely different?) The ‘everything is information’ crowd often tend to end up describing a black-and-white world, where grey is just finely divided black-and-white. Personally I think we’re getting close to something better than that.

    Comment by speedbird — February 8, 2009 @ 4:11 pm


  2. Thanks speedbird.

    I think that “digital” is just a highly concentrated form a “analogue”. Everything’s “analogue”, but we have to make it “digital” in order to make any sense of anything… ;)

    Comment by Ian — February 9, 2009 @ 2:12 pm


  3. That’s the conclusion I’m coming to as well… nicely put! With the concomitant paradox that too much ‘sense’ serves only to confuse…

    Comment by speedbird — February 10, 2009 @ 4:05 am


  4. @speedbird: Thanks. Yeah, I hear you on that. Too much “sense” exceeds the signal-to-noise ratio…

    Also, check out Ran Prieur’s post for today (Feb 10, since I can’t link to it directly):
    “My statement that “mind, not matter, is fundamental” is still stuck in the western industrial-age separation between mind and matter. Suppose that reality is both mind and matter, the same way that light is both a particle and a wave. Depending on the context, sometimes reality behaves like objective physical matter and sometimes it behaves like a dream, but those are both just models we use to make sense of a single unified thing.”

    Comment by Ian — February 10, 2009 @ 12:09 pm



Leave a comment»
















Leave a comment





WP