Mike Palij writes: >Allen, I really don't know what is wrong with you because given >the larger issues raised by my original post (i.e., the role of >Conservapedia, the concept of Deutsche Physik and it's re-emergence >in right-wring media, and role that ideology can play in defining >and the conduct of science) it seems like you are concentrating just >a little too much on phrase "well connedted" even though it has >nothing at all to do with the larger issues. It reminds me of the >discussion of the meaning "is" by >Bill Clinton; see: http://www.slate.com/id/1000162
Mike: Several people had responded to your original post. I simply wanted to point out a highly misleading expression in relation to Heisenberg. Are you suggesting that one should not on occasion take up a single item in another's post unless one deals with the main issue raised? That this has gone beyond one exchange is entirely because you seem to be unable to acknowledge that you may not have expressed the true situation accurately. As I've already pointed out, to say that someone was "well connected" to a high ranking Nazi carries obvious implications that were simply not the case in respect of Heisenberg. Nothing you have quoted from Powers adds anything of significance to the discussion. I've said all I want to say, so all I can add is, in the words of the adage, keep digging. Allen Esterson Former lecturer, Science Department Southwark College, London allenester...@compuserve.com http://www.esterson.org ------------------------------------------------------- Re: [tips] Conservapedia and the Deutsche Physik: When Ideology Drives Science Mike Palij Thu, 26 Aug 2010 06:47:41 -0700 On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 10:03:01 -0700, Allen Esterson wrote: >Mike Palij started his response (below) to my pointing out that his >assertion that Heisenberg was "well connected to high ranking Nazi >Heinrich Himmler" is misleading as follows: >> Well, as you say, it depends upon what one means by "well connected". > >Evidently Mike missed that my opening sentence was meant to be >tongue-in-cheek, as I hoped would be evident from the rest of my >paragraph, concluding that Heisenberg had no direct connection with >Himmler, and certainly was not "well connected". Again, it depends upon what one means by "well connected". You seem to imply that "well connected" means directly connected. I had not said that, indeed, it is possible to be "well connected" to people but, for various reasons, not directly connected but connected through others who act as intermediaries or go-betweens. >The implication of saying that someone was "well connected" to a high >ranking Nazi is clear enough. To repeat, this supposed connection was >nothing more than that Heisenberg's maternal grandfather had once >belonged to a hiking club to which Himmler's father had also belonged, >through which circumstance Himmler's mother was an acquaintance of >Heisenberg's mother. However, instead of acknowledging that what he >wrote was misleading, Mike apparently wants to defend his assertion, >evidently on the basis that the Wikipedia entry on "Deutsche Physik" >has an "additional detail". The only additional information relates to >Himmler's eventual response to Heisenberg's letter. Allen, I really don't know what is wrong with you because given the larger issues raised by my original post (i.e., the role of Conservapedia, the concept of Deutsche Physik and it's re-emergence in right-wring media, and role that ideology can play in defining and the conduct of science) it seems like you are concentrating just a little too much on phrase "well connedted" even though it has nothing at all to do with the larger issues. It reminds me of the discussion of the meaning "is" by Bill Clinton; see: http://www.slate.com/id/1000162 Getting back to showing that Heisenberg did have connections, through his mother and Himmler's mother to Himmler, I recommend to you Thomas Powers' "Heisenberg's War: The Secret History of the German Bomb", pages 40-43. The book is available on books.google.com http://books.google.com/books?id=4i2ghEnG6VkC&pg=PA42&dq=Heisenberg+himmler+Powers&hl=en&ei=h192TJiHE4yOjAfs67WqBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false or http://tinyurl.com/263bq6g At the bottom of page 41, Powers states that "Heisenberg's struggle with the Aryan physicists took a burlesque turn". Powers states that Heisenberg wanted to reach Himmler by letter to protest his treatment (which has been described before). Heisenberg asked his mother to contact Himmler's mother, Anna Maria Heyder, and asked her to intercede or provide an "entree" for Werner to Himmler. Powers quotes an interview of Mrs. Heyder that was conducted by the historian Alan Beyerchen (page 42) where the quote ends with "So if I say just a single word to him {i.e., Himmler], he will set the matter back to order." Though not stated, it is implied that Mrs. Heyder did speak to her son Himmler to hear Heisenberg's side of the story. Mrs. Heyder's "single word" allowed Heisenberg to write his July 21 letter which laid out his case. Himmler responded a couple of times to Heisenberg, but Himmler's letter of exoneration of Heisenberg came about one year later. Powers quotes this letter: "Precisely because you were recommended to my by my family, I caused your case to be examined with special care and intensity. I take pleasure in being able to inform you...that I have ensured that that there will be no futher atacks on your person". Now, quite frankly, I really don't care to convince you of whether my use of "well-connected" conforms to your use. I'll simply leave it at: if one's momma talks to another person's momma to get the person to change their behavior or do a favor, that's an example of being well connected. If you like, substitute parent, sibling, wife/husband/ and/or friend/colleague for momma. If one uses "small world theory" or "six degree of seperation", it is clear that anyone can usually get in contact with another person with a small number of intermediaries, but being able to contact someone through those intermediaries depends upon how well connected those intermediaries are. One may within six degrees of Kevin Bacon but that doesn't mean he'll return your calls. But if one's mother knows Kevin Bacon's mother and works through that route, one may get their phone calls returned. That's what I would call well-connected. For the "Small World Problem" aka "Six degree of seperation", see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_degrees_of_separation For "Siix Degress of Kevin Bacon", see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Degrees_of_Kevin_Bacon >Now if a brief exchange of letters is evidence for a "close >connection", let me reveal that I can claim a close connection with >that great Irish man of letters Conor Cruise O'Brien, and with Karl >Popper (no less). How nice for you. Oh, did your momma talk to their momma's to serve as an introduction to you when you contacted them? >Mike writes: >>It probably also depends upon what sources one relies on. > >One has to make a judgement call on that. I can only report that David >Cassidy's account is well referenced, and I know of no suggestion that >it is inaccurate in relation to what I wrote about, the background to >the acquaintanceship between Himmler's and Heisenberg's respective >mothers. I haven't looked at Cassidy's account but if it matches what Powers wrote, then I think it is a problem of interpretation, that is, your definition of "well-connected" and mine are just different. -Mike Palij New York University m...@nyu.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=4428 or send a blank email to leave-4428-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
