Western Science

[John Doe]

 As for the usefullness of such eastern notions in the
realm of particle physics; yes and no; ( a very
Western answer or Eastern, depending on how you want
to stress the sematics : )....sure, we toss in a
coupla' paradoxical ideas from Here, stir in a few
oxymoronic notions from There, sprinkle a pinch of Zen
koans on top, an we get ourselves a nice, groovy
poetsy, non Evil Westerner stew of Easternish
figurative expressions to help convey certain
recalcitrant concepts or images in the domain of
sun-atomic processes...however, all such dynamics of
atomic interactions are ultimately meaningfull to a
scientist when rendered mathematically; sure, Feynman
diagrams are great, but ya gotta know the math behind
them to USE them...

--- Rcfchess at aol.com wrote:

> The differences between "Western" and "Eastern"
> thinking have nothing to do  
> with science. Science is science, wherever. They
> have to do with philosophical 
>  frameworks and spiritual outlooks: basically,
> dualism vs. oneness; either-or 
> vs.  holistic. The only way this impinges on
> scientific outlook is that an 
> individual  - such as a scientist - may also have an
> individual perspective 
> which is  influenced by his/her origin or upbringing
> in either tradition; but that 
> is  outside the bounds of science, which remains the
> same. 
>  
> The only other common ground I can think of would
> pertain to areas such as  
> in quantum mechanics, wherein there are apparently
> scientifically proven (or, 
> at  least, postulated hypothetically) phenomena
> which appear to partake of a  
> non-linear, non-Euclidean mode of perception, and
> thus would be more amenable 
> to  understanding in terms of an "Eastern" way of
> understanding the world 
> (e.g.,  Heisenberg; the Tao of Physics; the Dancing
> Wu Li Masters; the Roots of  
> Coincidence [Koestler], etc.)
>  
> RF
> 



		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 
http://mail.yahoo.com