On Fri, 26 Mar 1999 09:23:42 -0800 Sam Pawlett <epawlett at uniserve.com>
writes:
>
>
>>
>>
>> I think science's very claims to be able to nail down "the truth"
>are
>> ideological.
>
>I doubt it. Why do you think this?
>
>> Science has very definite epistemological limitations,
>> e.g., the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.
>
>In practice, not in principle.
>
>> The very process of
>> scientific observation can distort what is under observation, no?
>
>Only unless you accept Bohm's interpretation of quantum physics. The
>uncertainty principle states that it is physically impossible to
>specify
>the the position and momentum of a particle simultaneously. This is
>because to reveal the particles position you must bounce light off of
>it,
>which changes its momentum. If you bounce too little light off of it,
>you
>can't know the momentum. On the Copenhagen interpretation, the
>particle's
>properties then depend on the act of measurement. The C school thought
>that it followed from this that the electron has neither position or
>momentum. However, these peculiar properties are intrinsic
>charateristics
>of the electrons themselves and not just the way one looks at them or
>talks about them. Realism is thus compatible with quantum theory.
> Heisenberg himself was a realist:
>"It mat sometimes take many years before one knows the solution of a
>problem, before one can distinguish between truth and error; but
>finally
>the questions will be decided, and the decisions are made not by any
>group
>of scientists but by nature itself. Therefore, scientific ideas spread
>among those who are interested inscience in an entirely different way
>from
>the propagation of political ideas. While polical ideas may gain a
>convincing influence among great masses of people just because they
>correspond or seem to correspond to teh prevailing interests of the
>people, scientific ideas spread because they are true. There are
>objective
>and final criteria asuring the correctness of a scientific statement.
>"
>Physics and Philosophy. Werner Heisenberg p194.
However, Heisenberg's presentation of the Copenhagen Interpretation was arguably idealist in substance. Clearly, in this interpretation the properties of subatomic particles were seen as being dependent on the observer. It was precisely because Einstein was a scientific realist, that he challenged the Copenhagen Interpretation, and even standard quantum mechanic itself. Heisenberg may have made ritual genuflections to realism but his theorizing was arguably more idealist in character.
Jim Farmelant
>
>Sam Pawlett
>
>
>
___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]