Scientific equations are metaphors in a very precise language typically fully understood and appreciated only by those familiar with a very narrow dialect of that laguage. Excerpting one equation from a paper is similar to lucky dipping a Bible verse to prove a point, and presenting it in the original Hebrew. Bad science. Bad exegesis.
As a physicist I have written similar equations understood by some physicists and laser engineers. To others I summarize my paper as measuring how a laser beam spreads and blurs; without showing them the integral equation of a high order two-dimensional exponential.
I’ve been reading your Substack for a couple of weeks. You’ve already helped me deconstruct my indoctrination that “God” must be omniscient and omnipotent. Which helps explain something that I’ve know for a long time - I am both atheist and agnostic. Atheist in the sense that I am certain that there is no omniscient and omnipotent God. Agnostic in the sense that I am open to the possibility of a God that is sentient. Which would be quite an accomplishment for anything that BIG, right? That was week 1; and now we get this for week 2.
One thing that you alluded to that I would like to restate more firmly. The contradiction between science and spirituality is false, or at the very least exaggerated. All of us use both of them constantly, and I have concluded (teleologically) that the more we intermingle them the better the results. Scientifically speaking, aren’t we just talking about the difference between the right and left brain? In which case, I amend “all of us” to “almost all” and point out that this is a testable hypothesis.
Fascinating reading! Philosophical stuff that I can actually comprehend…I may have to subscribe if you keep this up ! I am 78 yo and have always followed my father’s teachings…he even came up with his law. “Do the free things first”🤗. It’s called Retherford’s Law, but you won’t find it in a text book. Thanks for a good ‘morning coffee’ read.
Scientific equations are metaphors in a very precise language typically fully understood and appreciated only by those familiar with a very narrow dialect of that laguage. Excerpting one equation from a paper is similar to lucky dipping a Bible verse to prove a point, and presenting it in the original Hebrew. Bad science. Bad exegesis.
As a physicist I have written similar equations understood by some physicists and laser engineers. To others I summarize my paper as measuring how a laser beam spreads and blurs; without showing them the integral equation of a high order two-dimensional exponential.
I’ve been reading your Substack for a couple of weeks. You’ve already helped me deconstruct my indoctrination that “God” must be omniscient and omnipotent. Which helps explain something that I’ve know for a long time - I am both atheist and agnostic. Atheist in the sense that I am certain that there is no omniscient and omnipotent God. Agnostic in the sense that I am open to the possibility of a God that is sentient. Which would be quite an accomplishment for anything that BIG, right? That was week 1; and now we get this for week 2.
One thing that you alluded to that I would like to restate more firmly. The contradiction between science and spirituality is false, or at the very least exaggerated. All of us use both of them constantly, and I have concluded (teleologically) that the more we intermingle them the better the results. Scientifically speaking, aren’t we just talking about the difference between the right and left brain? In which case, I amend “all of us” to “almost all” and point out that this is a testable hypothesis.
I appreciate your list of 31 things to do.
Fascinating reading! Philosophical stuff that I can actually comprehend…I may have to subscribe if you keep this up ! I am 78 yo and have always followed my father’s teachings…he even came up with his law. “Do the free things first”🤗. It’s called Retherford’s Law, but you won’t find it in a text book. Thanks for a good ‘morning coffee’ read.