ChrisThoburn wrote:
: The process of observation will change the system (basic physics). My intent
: was not to suggest
: that one should only study intact systems,
: but rather that when thoeries (drawn
: from components
: of a system) are applied to the system as a whole, they can not be given the
: same level of
: validity. I understand that for practical reasons, one must usually do
: experiments in this manner,
: but I find that the majority of people fail to understand this concept.
I wholeheartedly agree. The results of an in vitro experiment only allow us
to predict more confidently, not more accurately, what goes on within intact
systems.
: I agree, perspective is the key. First,
: sementics are of dubious value when you
: play with
: thoughts in your head, but are of critical importance when you try to convey
: your thoughts and
: ideas to others. (As you can tell I have cartainly ot mastered this area).
Interesting. To me, mastery might be more the willingness to improve
continuously, rather than attain a point where impovement is no longer
conceivable. (I know, off-topic to the max. :)
: Second, every theory is
: wrong (either by construction of limitation
: of detail) but conveys some aspect
: of the underlying
: truth. This being the case, it would seem
: that the best way to approximate this
: truth is to
: compile as many points of view as possible. The only thing we know about the
: truth is that it
: must explain all of the observations (the boundry). Knowledge can be taught,
: but understanding
: must come from within.
Very wise. No arguments from me.
TKendrick
