This actually reminded me of H.G. Wells's "The Country of the Blind" story, where a climber ends up lost in a valley populated by a tribe of blind people who refuse to believe him when he tries to tell them about the concept of sight.¨
I would not at all be surprised if we keep revealing new layers of reality. I'd go as far as to say it'd be a tiny bit arrogant to assume we've reached the final stage of understanding the world. The best we can hope for is to keep getting incrementally closer to it over time.
I agree with this: we need to be humble enough to recognize that, every time we think we have a good idea of how things work, it's been revealed just to be a close approximation that works for calculations and such (for now, anyway).
The American novelist Howard Fast once wrote a story that very closely resembles the Allegory of the Cave, but it was set in a movie theatre. He was clearly trying to make some kind of point....
Actually, the image of the cave and the shadows made me imagine the wall and the 2D images cast upon it from 3D sources. What if the things we perceive are shadows of 4D objects cast on a 3D "wall"?
I have to ask, timidly, If the Einstein image was A.I. Generated because there are more fingers shown than a sausage can has sausages. Distracting. They look like a can of worms..
Cormac McCarthy said “when you first hear of Plato’s cave you set about reconstructing it” which I think is really true. It’s such a strange image-the people shackled watching the shadows. And it hits so true for our world today in so many ways
What makes you say that it's unlikely? Or do you mean it's unlikely that he never heard of the super duper famous physics experiment involving light, when he was clearly thinking deeply about light? If it's the latter, I completely agree.
This actually reminded me of H.G. Wells's "The Country of the Blind" story, where a climber ends up lost in a valley populated by a tribe of blind people who refuse to believe him when he tries to tell them about the concept of sight.¨
I would not at all be surprised if we keep revealing new layers of reality. I'd go as far as to say it'd be a tiny bit arrogant to assume we've reached the final stage of understanding the world. The best we can hope for is to keep getting incrementally closer to it over time.
I agree with this: we need to be humble enough to recognize that, every time we think we have a good idea of how things work, it's been revealed just to be a close approximation that works for calculations and such (for now, anyway).
Good book.
The American novelist Howard Fast once wrote a story that very closely resembles the Allegory of the Cave, but it was set in a movie theatre. He was clearly trying to make some kind of point....
Actually, the image of the cave and the shadows made me imagine the wall and the 2D images cast upon it from 3D sources. What if the things we perceive are shadows of 4D objects cast on a 3D "wall"?
If you've never seen Sagan's definition of "Flatland", I highly recommend checking it out (or revisiting, if you've seen it): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnURElCzGc0
SO fun to think about.
on the flip side, Dan, the Holographic Universe Theory kind of inverts what you're saying! Really interesting stuff.
I have to ask, timidly, If the Einstein image was A.I. Generated because there are more fingers shown than a sausage can has sausages. Distracting. They look like a can of worms..
Indeed it was/is. I just replaced it with a better one!
("Better" is subjective)
Nice one!
Thanks for catching the goofy fingers! I'm usually pretty on-point with stuff like that.
Cormac McCarthy said “when you first hear of Plato’s cave you set about reconstructing it” which I think is really true. It’s such a strange image-the people shackled watching the shadows. And it hits so true for our world today in so many ways
I will plug for Noether's First Theorem with was crucial for GR. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noether%27s_theorem
Einstein claimed never to have seen Michelson and Morely's experiment, too. I'm like, RIIIIIIGHT
It is possible but very unlikely. What is possible is that he had not figured out how to merge it with the rest of his working theory.
What makes you say that it's unlikely? Or do you mean it's unlikely that he never heard of the super duper famous physics experiment involving light, when he was clearly thinking deeply about light? If it's the latter, I completely agree.
There is a difference between "heard of" and "figured out the math of"
In the early days of GR, there was a problem with the mathematics that again only Noether Theorem gives the answer to.