Re: Quantum Physics

[Ayten Aydin <***>]

Dear Jack,
A very wise post. I agree with every word you put there. It provides a good
context to our ongoing particular process of which  every one of us is
trying to be an integral part with his/her both ontological and
epistemological bagages. Their content is certainly non-stop maturing also
owing to these interactions.
Ayten

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Park" <***>
To: <***>
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 7:13 PM
Subject: Re: Quantum Physics


> Jerry Zhu wrote:
>
> >>SJ: All these statements are based on just one of
> >>our
> >>models, namely, Quantum Mechanics. You're implicity
> >>according it a higher ontological status in saying
> >>that  that's the way things "really" are at the
> >>microscopic level. There is no reason for doing so
> >>as QM is just another model.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >JZ: Please tell me that I do not have an impression
> >that you are to discredit three decades' work of Max
> >Planck, Albert Einstein, Niels Bohr, Louis De Broglie,
> >Erwin Schrodinger, Wolfgang Pauli, Werner Heisenberg,
> >and Paul Dirac by replacing their model with another
> >model.... maybe a Newtonian relational hybrid model?
> >
> >
> >
> My 0.2 Euros: I don't think that SJ, or RR, or anyone else on this list
> is trying to discredit any *thing* or anybody. The thrust of this list,
> it just seems to me, is that the world is larger than any particular or
> single model. That's a point that I think Judith Rosen has been trying
> to make for as long as I have been following her writing. Sometimes, the
> words don't come out in ways which make that clear. I don't have a
> problem with SJ's  "...QM is just another model." Possibly a damn good
> model, but not necessarily the purveyor of all the truth there is to
> find out there. Whatever impression you get from what you read here is,
> I believe, a construction in your own mind. You bring to this forum
> those biases you already have. Others, myself included, do precisely the
> same thing.  There will always be the "santa clause effect" -- possibly
> not approprate as a metaphor to all possible cultures, but you have to
> have seen what happens to a young kid when it finally dawns that there
> is no fat old man in red jammies living in the north pole. We all have
> our belief systems, and those systems need, I think, to be flexible,
> lest we become religious and lose site of all possible truths to behold.
> Each truth, along the way, serves its purpose, and humankind grows.
> Let's not turn this forum into a pissing contest like " your jesus is
> bigger than mine." That this forum focuses on a particular model, one
> which was created by Robert Rosen, should not imply that the Rosenean
> model is anything other than "just another model", making its
> contribution to the growth in our understanding of the complexites in
> which we are immersed. I think it to be an important model, one I hope
> to understand and apply some day real soon now.
>
> Cheers,
> Jack
>
>