On Sep 7, 2010, at 2:03 PM, John Carl wrote: > Hi Marsha, > > >> Greetings John, >> >> When physicists state that photons are 'real', what do you think >> they mean? > > > I believe they mean something social, Marsh - intersubjective agreement. > > It leads one to an interesting thought experiment. Suppose one researcher > just couldn't "see" the evidence? What if 10 had a problem? What if more > than half? When does something become actually real?
Greetings John, I wasn't speaking of those on this list who are analyzing the physicists metaphysical notion of 'real'. Most, of these physicists/scientists are scientific materialist and they believe that the photon is an independent existing entity. > > >> Or when someone states gravity is 'real'. what do >> suppose they mean? I've even heard a physicist state that particle >> spin is not just a mathematical equation, but is something 'real'. >> I believe this - photon, gravity, particle spin - is supposed to >> represent something having independent existence in an external >> world. But what has happened is a conceptual construct abstracted >> from interdependent processes has been analyzed into being a >> real object. >> > > As an idealist, I have a problem with that label because after all, ideas > are "real" too. Most human beings have a world view that the world is made of themselves, an independent entity and independent entities and objects in an external world. I do not dispute that those on this list are grappling with other metaphysical notions. Marsha ___ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
