As forewarned, CERN has presser tomorrow on Higgs

[Mark Kohut]

  So, the smiling truths in Monte's remark sorta adds weight to this guy's pre-AtD claims?  All effects not
the science itself?
 
  Another thought about what is 'missing' in AtD, given the author's ambitious focus on World Historical meanings
is the Freudian 'depth-psychology' revolution. Perhaos the indirection here is in our somehow-Jungian author exploring
all those sex-based relationships in the 900s of AtD?   Freud said it was Sex, sex sex, I say simplistically. Jung took 
that and spun other aspects more, perhaps, than Freud did?
 
 

In a literary periodical essay on Mr. Pynchon I was browsing, which I will cite if necessary (but it would lose our focus here)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/20120708/2719247d/attachment.html>