As forewarned, CERN has presser tomorrow on Higgs

[Mark Kohut]

 "by indirection we find direction out"?.........


From: Monte Davis <montedavis at verizon.net>
To: 'Mark Kohut' <markekohut at yahoo.com>; 'Pynchon- L' <pynchon-l at waste.org> 
Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 4:34 AM
Subject: RE: As forewarned, CERN has presser tomorrow on Higgs


>none of the major 20th C. scientific discoveries during the time AtD is set are
even alluded to…
 
e.g., had he wanted to allude to Einstein and relativity, one might expect to find lots of trains, clocks, mirrors, tatzel-wormholes, time machines… and of course there’s none of that. J
 
 
From:owner-pynchon-l at waste.org [mailto:owner-pynchon-l at waste.org] On Behalf Of Mark Kohut
Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2012 4:44 PM
To: Pynchon- L
Subject: Re: As forewarned, CERN has presser tomorrow on Higgs
 
Is this, perhaps, an insight into why none of the major 20th C. scientific discoveries during the time AtD is set are
even alluded to, as has been observed by more than one Heisenbergerian plister,  given all the maths and faux science there is in the novel?
 
From:Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com>
To: Prashant Kumar <siva.prashant.kumar at gmail.com>; David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> 
Cc: Monte Davis <montedavis at verizon.net>; pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org> 
Sent: Saturday, July 7, 2012 4:31 PM
Subject: Re: As forewarned, CERN has presser tomorrow on Higgs
 
In a literary periodical essay on Mr. Pynchon I was browsing, which I will cite if necessary (but it would lose our focus here)
the writer made this observation: (I paraphrase)..in our Western world culture, since the Renaissance, the proven science has,
in general, been proven when the advance guard of scientists and intellectuals sorta already KNEW what (most of) the new truths
would be. Hard science predicted the discoveries that then started permaeating the culture.
 
I thought of the Higgs post(s) saying this 'proves' what scientists have long predicted.
 
Anyway, the Pynchon essayist says THIS is the major perspective that pynchon has re science, that is
its cultural effects and, with lotsa other thematic perspectives, what it means re us, human beings (at least we once were. V.)
 
There is GR, permeated by a scientifically-made rocket and Slothrop fleeing his Pavlovian determinism (and real bombs)
.......(and, since the essay, ATD).....
 
 
 
From:Prashant Kumar <siva.prashant.kumar at gmail.com>
To: David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> 
Cc: Monte Davis <montedavis at verizon.net>; pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org> 
Sent: Saturday, July 7, 2012 2:12 AM
Subject: Re: As forewarned, CERN has presser tomorrow on Higgs
 
Well if you/anyone have/has any physics-y questions regarding the above I'd be happy to oblige...
On 7 July 2012 14:45, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
This discussion should not end this soon. 
 
Existence, Mass (not RC), Measurement, not meta. 
 
More please. 


On Friday, July 6, 2012, Monte Davis wrote:
Umm… by no means all photons are virtual particles.  
 
From:owner-pynchon-l at waste.org [mailto:owner-pynchon-l at waste.org] On Behalf Of Prashant Kumar
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 7:37 AM
To: Monte Davis; pynchon -l
Subject: Re: As forewarned, CERN has presser tomorrow on Higgs
 
What I meant is that you have the same debate regarding identity and individuality, but in the modern debate the object is not souls but quantum mechanical particles. In fact, the mathematical definition of photons is what leads to this debate: because they are massless, photons do not experience proper time they are known as 'virtual particles' and exist outside of the reality of massive particles, in some sense. Now since every photon is identical, you have serious problems defining identity. Think 'spirit world', and you have the connection to Duns Scotus' haecceities.
 
Prashant
 
On 6 July 2012 18:40, Monte Davis <montedavis at verizon.net> wrote:
In defense of physicists (of whom I am not one):  what distinguishes
massless particles (e.g. photons) from scholastic word-spinning is that (1)
their properties are unambiguously, mathematically defined; (2) those
p[roperties have led to a century of predictions verified to many decimal
places; and (3) they are the only properties consistent with such irrelevant
arcana as stars shining, atoms cohering, and DVD lasers playing.

My apologies to Abelard and Duns Scotus if that's the kind of thing they
were doing and I missed it.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pynchon-l at waste.org [mailto:owner-pynchon-l at waste.org] On Behalf
Of Paul Mackin
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 12:24 PM
To: pynchon-l at waste.org
Subject: Re: As forewarned, CERN has presser tomorrow on Higgs
On 7/5/2012 11:35 AM, David Morris wrote:
> OK, I stand corrected.  Existence w/o mass.  I expect such existence
> would never become more organized than at the sub-atomic level.  But
> I'm no physicist.

Me neither, but somehow I'm reminded of the Medieval controversy over the
distinction between essence and existence, if any.

P
>
> On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Monte Davis <montedavis at verizon.net>
wrote:
>> It bestows mass; they haven't [yet] gotten around to a field/particle
>> that "bestows existence."
>>
>>
>>
>>  From  David Morris
>> Higgs is the new either, a medium that bestows existence.
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20120708/f13a9cf4/attachment.html>