Mike, Jon, List,

I asked Fernando Zalamea--my go-to scholar for questions regarding
mathematical continutiy--and, while he noted that physics is not at all his
field, he responded by writing (in part):

FZ: I imagine that the Proceedings of the Harvard Sesquicentennial
dedicated to Peirce’s Physics may have clues.

*[note: for the Proceedings, see;
http://catalogue.wellcomelibrary.org/search~S8?/aCharles+S.+Peirce+Sesquicentennial+International+Congress+%281989+%3A+Harvard+University%29/acharles+s+peirce+sesquicentennial+international+congress+++++1989+harvard+university/-3,-1,0,B/browse
<http://catalogue.wellcomelibrary.org/search~S8?/aCharles+S.+Peirce+Sesquicentennial+International+Congress+%281989+%3A+Harvard+University%29/acharles+s+peirce+sesquicentennial+international+congress+++++1989+harvard+university/-3,-1,0,B/browse>*

*for the contents of papers selected by Matthew Moore from the Proceedings
see,  http://catalogue.wellcomelibrary.org/record=b1023422
<http://catalogue.wellcomelibrary.org/record=b1023422> *

*One paper in that collection by D. Sfendoni-Mentzou has the intriguing
title, The role of potentiality in Peirce's tychism and in contemporary
discussions in quantum mechanics and microphysics ; see:
http://www.academia.edu/20431455/THE_ROLE_OF_POTENTIALITY_IN_PEIRCES_TYCHISM_AND_IN_CONTEMPORARY_DISCUSSIONS_IN_QUANTUM_MECHANICS_AND_MICROPHYSICS
<http://www.academia.edu/20431455/THE_ROLE_OF_POTENTIALITY_IN_PEIRCES_TYCHISM_AND_IN_CONTEMPORARY_DISCUSSIONS_IN_QUANTUM_MECHANICS_AND_MICROPHYSICS>
GR]*


FZ: On the other hand, *as far as I know, relational logic is far from
quantum logic. This second trend originates with von Neumann's Continuous
Geometries and orthomodular lattices, something that, I think, Peirce could
not envision.* (emphasis added)


I have not yet read the paper you pointed to Mike (I intend to), but
although I have sometimes thought otherwise (based principally on a readong
of the 1898 lecture series, published as *Reasoning and the Logic of
Things), *I would at present  temd tp agree with Zalamea here.

And I  agree with the whole of Jon Awbrey's post leading to his conclusion:

JA:  I think the full import of [Peirce's] on-theoretic and
pragmatic-semiotic approaches to scientific inquiry is a task for the
future to
work out.


Best,

Gary R


[image: Gary Richmond]

*Gary Richmond*
*Philosophy and Critical Thinking*
*Communication Studies*
*LaGuardia College of the City University of New York*
*C 745*
*718 482-5690 <(718)%20482-5690>*

On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Jon Awbrey <[email protected]> wrote:

> Mike, List,
>
> The mathematical perspectives and theories that made modern physics
> possible,
> perhaps even inevitable, were developed by many mathematicians, both
> abstract
> and applied, all throughout the 19th Century.  There was a definite sea
> change
> in the way scientists began to view the relationship between mathematical
> models
> and the physical world, passing from a monolithic concept to variational
> choices
> among multiple approaches, models, perspectives, and theories.
>
> Peirce was an astute observer and active participant in this
> transformation but
> it has always been difficult to trace his true impact on its course — so
> much of
> what he contributed operated underground, rhizome like, and without
> recognition.
> But I think it's fair to say that Peirce articulated the springs and
> catches of
> the workings of science better than any other reflective practitioner in
> his or
> subsequent times.  And I think the full import of his
> information-theoretic and
> pragmatic-semiotic approaches to scientific inquiry is a task for the
> future to
> work out.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jon
>
>
> On 5/14/2017 1:34 AM, Mike Bergman wrote:
>
>> I just encountered this assertion:
>>
>> "In the present work we have indicated that a form of logic, relational
>> logic
>> developed by C. S. Peirce, may serve as the foundation of both quantum
>> mechanics
>> and string theory." [1]
>>
>> Does the list have any comments, further references or criticisms on this
>> pretty
>> bold statement?
>>
>> Thanks, Mike
>>
>> [1] A. Nicolaidis, 2008. "Categorical Foundation of Quantum Mechanics and
>> String
>> Theory," arXiv:0812.1946, 10 Dec 2008. See https://arxiv.org/pdf/0812.194
>> 6.pdf
>>
>>
> --
>
> inquiry into inquiry: https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/
> academia: https://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey
> oeiswiki: https://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
> isw: http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/JLA
> facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/JonnyCache
>
>
> -----------------------------
> PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON
> PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to
> [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L
> but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the
> BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm
> .
>
>
>
>
>
>
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L 
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To 
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the 
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at 
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .




Reply via email to