Academic Freedom

As fans of Dune will readily see, an ornithopter is a flapping wing flying machine, as a helicopter is a rotary wing flying machine. Where of course we have seen how Dragonflies are elliptical winged insects capable of up to 56 km/h speed. They also have pterostigmas that control flutter, gaining up to 25% speed [in gliding mode]. Then, there are airflow and wing flex sensors that indicate sophisticated, highly tuned control loop networks. These insects are capable of forward and reverse flight, hovering and sideways flight. They also have up to 97% success rate in predation. Such a natural model will of course inspire engineers. So, we can see here, a Dragonfly robot ornithopter: A clip: Resemblance to a Read More ›

Last time, we looked at how Kolmogorov Complexity can be used to quantify the information in functionally specific complex organisation, by using the formal idea of a 3-D universal printer and constructor, 3-DP/C: . . . it is but a short step to imagine a universal constructor device which, fed a compact description in a suitable language, will construct and present the [obviously, finite] object. Let us call this the universal 3-D printer/constructor, 3-DP/C. Thus, in principle, reduction of an organised entity to a description in a suitably compact language is formally equivalent in information terms to the object, once 3-DP/C is present as a conceptual entity. So, WLOG, reduction to compact description in a compact language d(E) is readily Read More ›

IEP summarises: “Critical Rationalism” is the name Karl Popper (1902-1994) gave to a modest and self-critical rationalism. He contrasted this view with “uncritical or comprehensive rationalism,” the received justificationist view that only what can be proved by reason and/or experience should be accepted. Popper argued that comprehensive rationalism cannot explain how proof is possible and that it leads to inconsistencies. Critical rationalism today is the project of extending Popper’s approach to all areas of thought and action. In each field the central task of critical rationalism is to replace allegedly justificatory methods with critical ones. A common summary of this is that it replaces knowledge as justified, true belief, with “knowledge is unjustified untrue unbelief.” That is, we see here Read More ›

One of the more peculiar objections to the design inference is the strident, often repeated claim that the genetic code is not a code, and that DNA and mRNA are not storing algorithmic, coded information used in protein synthesis. These are tied to the string (yes, s-t-r-i-n-g) data structure, a key foundational array for information storage, transfer and application. So, it seems useful to address the string as a key first principles issue, with the onward point being that strings of course can and do store coded information. Let us begin with, what a string — yes, s-t-r-i-n-g — is (though that should already be obvious from even the headline): Geeks for Geeks: A string is a sequence of characters, Read More ›

Quantum computing, of course, has been a hot sci-tech topic in recent years, what with stories as to how it will obsolete the large prime number product encryption schemes that give us some of our strongest codes, and stories of vast computing power exponentially beyond our hottest supercomputers today. With hot money being poured in by the wheelbarrow load. (Well, maybe buckets of bits as most serious transactions are digital nowadays. Itself already a problem . . . security is an issue.) What are we to make of this? (My bet is, superposition. Itself, a core quantum issue.) Reader and commenter, Relatd, has given us a useful, first level video: (A good place to begin, a useful survey with some Read More ›

Arvin Ash poses a macro scale parallel to entanglement (while using a Stern-Gerlach apparatus): Vid: Ash highlights, of course, that once entangled, particles have superposed wave functions leading to inherent non locality. So, spooky action at a distance overlooks that non locality. And as with the gloves, Alice needs to know her particle is part of an entangled pair to freely infer Bob got the other one, so to speak. Information has not evaded the speed of light limit. Translation,* our concept of space, needs to be er, ah, uh, quantum adjusted. That was already lurking in low intensity beam interference and superposition. KF *PS, added to show certain objectors that “translated” needs not be pernicious. PPS, DV, quantum computing Read More ›

Arvin Ash poses a macro scale parallel to entanglement (while using a Stern-Gerlach apparatus): Vid: Ash highlights, of course, that once entangled, particles have superposed wave functions leading to inherent non locality. So, spooky action at a distance overlooks that non locality. And as with the gloves, Alice needs to know her particle is part of an entangled pair to freely infer Bob got the other one, so to speak. Information has not evaded the speed of light limit. Translation,* our concept of space, needs to be er, ah, uh, quantum adjusted. That was already lurking in low intensity beam interference and superposition. KF *PS, added to show certain objectors that “translated” needs not be pernicious. PPS, DV, quantum computing Read More ›

So, here we go: And, the rise of solid state laser pointers makes this sort of exercise so much easier, BUT YOU MUST BE CAREFUL NOT TO GET SUCH A BRIGHT SOURCE INTO YOUR EYE AS THIS MAY CAUSE RETINAL BURNS THUS BLIND SPOTS. (I recall, buying and assembling a kit He-Ne laser to have this exercise for my High School students. We had a ball, using metre sticks stuck to a screen with blu-tack, to observe and measure effects from several metres away.) So, now, what about, electrons: Notice, the pattern here builds up statistically, one spot at a time. Then, HT BA77 way back, here is Dr Quantum: Now, if you think you have it all figured out, Read More ›

A video discussion with Eric Metaxas: After telling of his experiences in China where he was born in the 1940’s, Guinness speaks of a moment when a civilisation loses touch with its roots. He suggests, there then are three alternatives: renewal, replacement or decline. As the modern jacobins rise up again, our civilisation faces that choice, at kairos; with lawful, ordered freedom in the stakes as 1776 [not, 1619 — a toxic slander driven distraction] clashes with 1789, so, too, frankly, 1917 – 49. And we need to recall the challenge to not throw out the baby with the bath water. END PS, ponder

One way to define Philosophy, is to note that it is that department of thought that addresses hard, core questions. Known to be hard as there are no easy answers. Where, core topics include metaphysics [critical analysis of worldviews on what reality is, what exists etc], epistemology [core questions on “knowledge”], logic [what are the principles of right reason], ethics/morals [virtue, the good, evil, duty, justice etc], aesthetics [what is beauty], and of course meta issues emerging from other subjects such as politics, history, Mathematics, Theology/Religion, Science, Psychology, Medicine, Education etc. As we look at such a list, we can see that one reason why these are difficult is that it is very hard to avoid self-referentiality on such topics, Read More ›

Peter Robinson’s Uncommon Knowledge brings three authors together, Tom Holland, Stephen Meyer and Douglas Murray: A key consideration: vs, this notorious poetic assertion: Of course, both of these reflect the rise of the skeptical mindset among the educated elites, the modern inferior good that stands in for the cardinal virtue, prudence. So, we cannot escape the epistemic challenge, what it means to know and to what confidence, especially as regards roots of reality and our place in reality. (Where, trivially, for any reasonably definable field, X, the claim that one knows on some warrant that there is no objective, knowable truth regarding X, is instantly self-referentially incoherent and self defeating. As this hyperskeptical claim is about X and claims objective Read More ›

again, as a certain objector here has accused: Right-wing grifters like Jordan Peterson, James Lindsay, and Christopher Rufo make a lot of money selling these lies to the gullible fools who get their worldview injected into their brains by downloading Fox News propaganda I have not previously heard of these two, but — courtesy YouTube — it is only fair to let them speak for themselves. Rufo: Lindsay: (He was here giving a workshop, and onward sessions here and here may be helpful.) I trust that in future, commenters will refrain from such intemperate language. END F/N: William S Lind interviews Roger Kimball in the 1990’s on culture form marxism and political correctness: Similarly, this discussion of the labour theory Read More ›