An endless student of cooperation’s art forms, I simply love watching teamwork in action. The fractals of cooperation are truly breathtaking to behold once you latch on. As I watched my oldest play basketball the other day (he was having a great game) I was reminded yet again of this simple truth.
Dividing the whole into its respective parts is probably the ultimate rabbit hole exercise; there are simply an infinite variety of ways to slice a pie so to speak. Yet our high priests of science, our physicists, attempted just this when they created an elaborate division classification system for what they think is most atomic (the word atom derives from the Greek ἄτομος/átomos, α-τεμνω, meaning uncuttable, indivisible, or something which cannot be divided further).
They classified some of these atomic constituents as fermions, which you can think of as the “real” or “substantial” stuff of the atomic world- e.g. electrons, protons and neutrons, etc... And they have classified other atomic building blocks as Bosons, which you can think of as the “unreal” or force-like stuff that builds the atom.
My own pop physics mentality tends to imagine a macro analogy where fermions are the players on a basketball team and Bozons are the big salaries which creates the condensate or the team itself. I’m split on how to actually classify the team. Thoughts would be appreciated…
Anyway it should come as no surprise that others soon realized even fermions might have their own building blocks, e.g. quarks and Leptons. And even quarks and leptons might still have their own building blocks, etc…
And don’t get me going on the Boson building block theory physicists have proposed as I simply don’t understand it… Though I will add some have created cool songs on the subject while others still have made a fortune selling us thrillers on the mysteries of the Higgs-Boson, a.k.a ”the god particle”.
And so it will be interesting to see if physicists ever do reach ground floor of this rabbit hole in division. As far I’m aware, they are not there and I’m skeptical they will ever be- time will obviously tell. Yet I too enjoy playing their game: shifting views from one aspect of one building block to another aspect of another as I “see” the endless fractal structures inherent in “things”. And it is these fractal appellations in the cooperation of teams that circles me back to the original point of my post: fractals, teams, and cooperation.
In the interest of brevity, I'll commence this in part II
Bonds And Money
1 year ago
45 comments:
What would a gravity bump look like?
Negative gravity to you and I, e.g. a repulsive weak force?
Doesn't make sense
And how would you classify the basketball team itself?
Is the team the Bosonic "force" or "attractor"?
From some perspectives I suspect it is (say from the loyalty to team perspective 3:20-4:20), yet from others I think it is not.
Or is it an outside force (ignoring the team loyalty perspective as per prior example) which is the Boson (like $)?
???
And is the team the condensate?
My own perspective tends to say yes but I can see other perspectives where "no" is just as valid.
Geometry itself is bounded by hysteresis.
PS- would love a Ceasarism post ;-)
This is blog land, not the New England Journal
PPS- Toby (whom I sense is a good soul) thinks particles are an illusion created from the wave itself.
Understand
Best of luck in trial or wherever
I find all of this and the dialogue fascinating. I love trying to learn about this. Sadly I missed my physics curve. Much like a language I think you have a period of time in your life where your brain is most open to these concepts and mine is long gone so I struggle despite my enthusiasm.
In my attempt to learn I recently purchased and read "Six Easy Pieces" by Richard Feynman the great physicist and father of Quantum Electrodynamics. My God what a treat it must have been to know him. I so want to go to a strip joint with him. He sounds like a blast. Perhaps one of the best quotes I have ever read about what we "know" and science and what constitutes knowledge came from him.
Feynman was once asked by a CalTech faculty member to explain why spin 1/2 particles obey Fermi-Dirac statistics. He replied "I'll prepare a freshman lecture on it". A few days latter he returned and said "You know I couldn't do it.I could not reduce it to the freshman level. That means we really don't understand it"
That quote almost made me cry. Really, I almost cried. I understand nothing too!
LOL!!! and amen
Does it sound so different from psychiatry after all? ;-)
It seems much more noble Thai. Most days I want to come home from work and shower with a wire brush. I doubt Feynman or Dirac ever felt like that?
I think I understand
Perhaps remembering that we are all connected and helping the person in front of you be more functional in the world in the context of their own world view and abilities (I can hear Deb squirming in her chair) frees up resources for Feynman.
To balance your Ayn Rand frustrations, remember that it is equally true that it took a village to produce Dirac.
We are a team
It makes me feel better that in some way I could contribute just a little to creating the next Dirac.
You always cheer me up. Thanks
We got your blindside my friend, honest.
Be well
Also Thai, I have to think in the end someone is going to come along with something much simpler than all of this that makes so much more sense and maybe even I will understand.At the core of all of this must be simpler "stuff".
Even if they do, I'll still see be looking at the fractals. They are simply too enjoyable to avoid ;-)
"You know I couldn't do it.I could not reduce it to the freshman level. That means we really don't understand it"
It reeks of truth!! I read a story from Feynman's youth. As a young teen he had a reputation of being handy with radios. When a neighbor's radio went on the fritz they asked him to come over. He tried a few things and then just sat and thought for a while. The solution came and he repaired the radio. The neighbor later told others "that kid can fix things with his mind. As if he were a warlock.
"Most days I want to come home from work and shower with a wire brush."
So there are certain behaviors I just can't see as compatible with a functional society. Drugs, alcohol, and similar self-indulgences rank among these behaviors. So if instead of disability, why not spend the cash on a hotel in some isolated part of the country where your wire-brush patients get their own rooms with room service that will bring them food, beverages, and any substances that they desire. They can have TV and internet. Only rule is that they have to be physically away from other people. They'll be happy because they'll self-indulge until they expire (at a very early age) or get "scared straight" and become viable citizens. We'll be happy because for the same amount of money (or likely less) our cooperative will function better. Win-win, yes?
"We got your blindside my friend, honest."
That's right. We got your back. Let me know when you need a quote from Caddyshack or an 80s song YouTube link and I'm on it!
"Energy is condensed spirit.
I got that one from Meditations on the Tarot."
"Last night I stayed up late playing poker with Tarot cards. I got a full house and four people died." (Steven Wright )
Re: "why not spend the cash on a hotel in some isolated part of the country where your wire-brush patients get their own rooms with room service that will bring them food, beverages, and any substances that they desire."
Seems like the most logical thing in the world, alas it won't work
1. You are spending the money that is still leading to your eventual bankruptcy
2. If you spend it, even in remote areas, you will simply encourage more of the same.
It's the reason EDs don't won't give Methadone to patients who have lost theirs, even if they really have lost it.
If word gets out, there will be 10 people who need it tomorrow.
... And it always gets out
You guys must have figured out by now that I can be a very irritating person.
I thought that you would like to know that two days ago on my loony forum I shook things up a little bit after a period of relative calm and told one of my friends that it was not by fiddling with her medication on a daily basis that she was going to get rid of her mood swings.
I regularly tell people that exercise WILL improve their mood, and pull them out of a slump.
I regularly tell them that opening their mouths and waiting for the molecule to drop in to produce the desired effect : temporary distraction from the human condition WILL NOT SAVE THEM in the long run.
So... how and why can i say things like this which get their hackles up admittedly, but they accept me, and even BUDGE on their behavior (these people are chronics, you guys...) and an official doc most often will obtain zero effect ?
Because... I put myself on the same level with them, no better, no worse. We are all in our little democratic experiment together, for better or for worse, but mostly for better.
I tell them that I have been there before, and that through PATIENCE and EFFORT and DISCIPLINE, AND LOVE OF COURSE, THE MOST IMPORTANT... they can emerge from their despairing perception of their lives.
I tell them.. that they are BEAUTIFUL people, with great empathy, sensitivity, and capacities for love, and I BELIEVE THIS, BECAUSE IT IS TRUE.
They are... loyal, caring.
And.. I treat them, love them, and enjoy being with them THE SAME WAY THAT I DO YOU GUYS ON THIS BLOG.
I hope this doesn't.. disappoint or shock you.
And... TOO BAD if it does, I say.
Um.. JP ? how about stating that in freshman physics terms ? Then I can understand. (I hope...)
And then... we can test if Bob really knows what he is talking about (and you too...).
Thanks. (I'm not saying this to be snide, I promise, but there are no good smileys hear that I can stick down to color these words a nice shade of pink.)
JP, thanks.
This is all new for me. I came across this today.
Good luck in adjudication
Deb re: $ and legitimacy
I completely agree
Well, JP, i am going to provide the freshman physics point of view...
you're talking about the axiomatic part being based on... FAITH.
No comment...
Deb, he was throwing you a bone
read the website
JP said "the systematic mapping of the unconscious mind, showing that human thought results from a dialectical (or "bi-logical") synthesis of the asymmetrical conscious and the symmetrical unconscious mind."
This sounds like airy descriptions of substance dualism i.e. "and than a miracle happens".
I do not know at all what this means. The mapping of the unconscious mind? Mapping is for things we do that have physical form and substance. The "unconscious" is a term most often used to explain anything anyone wants to, by followers of a Viennese witch doctors.
Please specify what this refers to JP
Are we having communication problems again, Thai ?
I wasn't exactly pummeling him, in MY opinion at least... Are you suggesting I am, or it that just my... hypersensitivity again ?
If I read all the links that are on this site, I wouldn't get to check out Toby, or Joe Bageant, or all those other cool people that Edwardo has linked to..
I have decided that the Protestant work ethic must no longer be around...
On the basis of your Internet hang outs... WHEN do you guys work ?? ;-)
I'm as confused as you John
JP, what is "the systematic mapping of the unconscious mind, showing that human thought results from a dialectical (or "bi-logical") synthesis of the asymmetrical conscious and the symmetrical unconscious mind."???
I think the Boson is, in fact, Boston, as in the Boston Celtics, the gravitational center, sorry Laker fans, of the NBA. All hail Bill Russell.
Now those are fighting words ;-)
Go Lakers!
I AGREE WITH YOU 100% Edwardo....
The hole in this argument is large enough to pilot the Titanic through.
Rubbish
It like seeing one said of two different coins and saying they are different.
No foul (the problem of aspect in blog chat again)
+ I tend to think out loud
Post a Comment