Re: On the physicality of length contraction

Edward Green wrote:
On Jul 24, 6:14 pm, Tom Roberts <tjroberts...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
coordinates and frames are mere artifacts of human imaginations --
it is OUTRAGEOUS to consider artifacts of human imaginations to be
somehow "physical" [#]. How do you distinguish these from fairies,
angels, and dragons [@]?

[#] Yes, you talked around this, apparently aware of
the disaster lurking in your claim. "quasi-physical"
is unsuitable; "completely unphysical" is the only
sensible choice for such imaginary artifacts.

[@] At a deeper level, is there really any need to make
such distinctions? That is, perhaps coordinate systems and
frames should be categorized with fairies, angels, and
dragons; thus they would have no place in physics....

Here is how one distinguishes coordinates systems and frames from
fairies, angels and dragons: they may be operationalized.

You can operationalize the use of metersticks and clocks to make measurements. You cannot operationalize the use of coordinates to aid in the description of physical phenomena -- that is inherently ABSTRACT (as are all descriptions and all theories).

I repeat: "completely unphysical" is the only sensible choice for such imaginary artifacts of human minds.

It is the possibility I brought up in [@] above that intrigues me.... Certainly coordinate-free formulations of our theories of physics are available, the question is can one come up with a theory of measurement without using coordinates? I now STRONGLY suspect one can.... I think this would basically take operationalism to its logical conclusion....


A coordinate system paints spacetime with quadruples of numbers.
Providing we can unambiguously relate the painting to the substrate we
may as well treat this construction as a mathematically definite
object labeling the physics

Hmmm. Such painting of labels cannot possibly be "physical" for any sensible meaning of the term; not even "quasi-physical". Even if you printed out paper labels with the quadruples and nailed them around your room (difficult for the time coordinate, but no matter), then the PAPERS would be physical, but the mapping of points in the room to quadruples of numbers would remain inherently ABSTRACT. That is a gulf you cannot possibly breach -- nature cares not a whit for what you are thinking, and your mind can only process thoughts, not physical objects.


Tom Roberts
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Non-homogenous theories of space and time
    ... For now, to my satisfaction, Black Holes Officially Exist unless you ... he does not exist in the time or space we observe. ... > physics we know of and we are free to invent new laws of physics for ... information than your story about angels throwing balls. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: SR Postulate on Speed of Light
    ... It just removes the answer from physics. ... But at the time that people were seriously thinking about this kind of question, people took it for granted that angels were real. ... It's because you take Newtonian physics for granted that the question seems to make sense, and it's specifically a Newtonian speed that you expect light to have. ... If the question ever becomes interesting again in light of a future theory, it will be a /different question/, because the words will be interpreted in terms of the new theory. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: An Accounting of the Soul
    ... angels can dance on the head of a needle. ... theory the world splits asunder at every point where outcome A or B ... Non-deterministic physics allows for other, as yet unidentified, processes ...
    (soc.culture.jewish.moderated)
  • Re: On the physicality of length contraction
    ... that coordinates and frames are mere artifacts of human imaginations -- ... angels, and dragons? ... operationalizing coordinate systems, we may begin to take the ones we ... As the goal of physics is modeling the world we inhabit, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Quantcast