Thursday, May 25, 2006

Veneziano and Theoretical Positions?

Jerome Rothstein:
As the universe cools, low-temperature forms of generalized life will be able to evolve. I believe it plausible that cold life will win over heat-death, that from the big bang on, there has been a succession of generalized life forms evolving, that they are still evolving, and that we share the cosmos with them.

Of course this is a good read, and consistant with what we have to learn. So, all questions about such evolvement should end? Dangle a carrot, then see it's attached to a response that would produce consistancy in educative thinking?


Not ony in measured values sent down to such reductionist valuations, but of no longerm limiting ourselves to how we see this birth? That may be the ole way Sean might have been taught(?), so maybe Veneziano had overstep his boundaries? :)

So then the question for me "is," if we held the view within context of the "arrow of time," are there such "cyclical processes," within context of the universe's unfoldment?

Cycle of Birth, Life, and Death-Origin, Indentity, and Destiny by Gabriele Veneziano

Was the big bang really the beginning of time? Or did the universe exist before then? Such a question seemed almost blasphemous only a decade ago. Most cosmologists insisted that it simply made no sense - that to contemplate a time before the big bang was like asking for directions to a place north of the North Pole. But developments in theoretical physics, especially the rise of string theory, have changed their perspective. The pre-bang universe has become the latest frontier of cosmology.

The new willingness to consider what might have happened before the bang is the latest swing of an intellectual pendulum that has rocked back and forth for millennia. In one form or another, the issue of the ultimate beginning has engaged philosophers and theologians in nearly every culture. It is entwined with a grand set of concerns, one famously encapsulated in an 1897 painting by Paul Gauguin: D'ou venons-nous? Que sommes-nous? Ou allons-nous? "Where do we come from? What are we? Where are we going?"

So we have this "reductionistic process" about such beginnings, and we are limited to only one universe? How would different rates of evolvement then happen within context of the universe's unfoldment?

So I guess we develope theoretical opinions and speak in philosophical ways?:)

Revolutions in Thinking?

Now that naturalism has become an accepted component of philosophy, there has recently been interest in reassessing Kuhn's work in the light of developments in the relevant sciences, many of which provide corroboration for Kuhn's claim that science is driven by relations of perceived similarity and analogy to existing problems and their solutions (Nickles 2003b, Nersessian 2003). It may yet be that a characteristically Kuhnian thesis will play a prominent part in our understanding of science.

Some things "still hold," to change?

No comments:

Post a Comment