Steve, After thinking about them I think curved manifolds are real just as right triangles. Perhaps my introspection deludes me.
I think you agree with me about thinking without language. Sometimes. In the morning I don't think, "Now I am going to open this cabinet to get a bowl..." Frank --- Frank C. Wimberly 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, Santa Fe, NM 87505 505 670-9918 Santa Fe, NM On Thu, May 28, 2020, 9:11 PM Steve Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > Frank - > > My first reaction: I don't think "bent space time" is a metaphor. I > don't use metaphor in thought because I know exactly what I "mean". > > unless space-time is a plastic/elastic solid (solid aether?), I'm not sure > what the phrase means if not metaphorically? If I want to talk about > space-time in this way more rigorously, I would not "bend" it, I would > describe it's geometry as non-euclidean. I would claim that we > metaphorically "bend" space-time *relative* to the idealized euclidean > space we all (most all?) apprehend somewhat directly (though our visual > system apprehends space in perspective geometry where objects are > consistently smaller by a factor of 1/r where r is their distance from > us). Sound is somewhat more complicated but also has a 1/r component. > > I'm not even sure I use language in thought except when I'm planning an > email, for instance. > > Frank/Eric - > > I do agree that the idea of "metaphors all the way down" shift a little > across this boundary. A lot of my own "thinking" is not explicitly > linguistic, but it *is* imagistic and involves analogs (analogies?), much > like an analog computer (of which there are many modes and examples, not > all electronic) operates perhaps? I think I related here that I was > dreaming in "celestial mechanics" for a while. I don't know enough details > about celestial mechanics to believe I was really honestly "calculating" > orbits and orbit-changes, etc... in any useful/literal way, I was just > "experiencing" what it *might* be like to somewhat directly control > thrusters with conserved energy and reaction mass whilst "feeling" > energetic isoclines in delta-v/gravity space. > > I didn't experience "bent space" so much as the same kind of dissonance I > feel when I try to think of great-circle navigation on a map or even more > entertaining/complicated, whilst in the context of winds (sailing/flying) > and currents/tides. My visual site-lines serve me fairly well, up to the > curvature of the earth, which would continue to serve me well in > interplanetary scale locomotion/navigation, yet if my propulsion method > includes a solar-sail (and/or magnetic induction aspects) > > I think that "metaphor" is used more in science to communicate with > outsiders and as shorthand (e.g. "bent" spacetime) among insiders. This is > where I will defer my language to Glen's appeals to switch to (my idea of > what he would ask for) analogy, formal analogy, mathematical models, formal > mappings within mathematical formulations. My only shot for metaphor at > this level is to refer to Lakoff/Nunez's "Where Mathematics Comes From" > which I claim provides a good argument for how even mathematics is > technically/fundamentally metaphorical. But rather than insist on that > (for no good reason), I am happy to converge on the use of the other > (analogy, model, mapping) terms. I think Glen asked me for something like > this directly offlist many months ago and I can't remember if I actually > said out loud that I was accepting that. (I hope I am characterizing > Glen's position and our interaction accurately). > > - Steve > > Eric Charles wrote: > >> I'm not sure I follow all the different sticking points this conversation >> has developed... but I'm gonna risk punch the tar baby anyway... >> >> I'm not sure Glen's point about "xyz" gets us very far. Sure, you can >> call anything you want by any label you want. I'm not sure anyone disputes >> that. But after that there remain three-ish different issues, which I think >> Nick tends to muddle: >> >> 1) The role of metaphor in communication. >> 2) The role of metaphor in thought. >> 3) The role of metaphor in science. >> >> >> > >> Did I punch the tar baby enough? Am I hopelessly stuck? Or did I possibly >> help accomplish anything? >> > Tar Babies R Us! > > I think you accomplished something for me... your 3 domains above are > useful to me and I hope my response registered somewhat to them, with > Frank's counter/example of "bent space" is helpful to you or others. > > I will leave the "toe/tow the line" metaphors alone here. I find the > *expanded* etymology of metaphors fascinating, especially when juxtoposed > phonographically as is this pair, but do think it is probably a distraction > from the point at hand. > > - Steve > -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . > ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ... > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ... FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
