[time 561] Re: [time 537] Theory of cs should predict its own discovery

Tue, 17 Aug 1999 22:56:23 +0900

Dear Matti,

I am at a hotel on Norikura Mountain and I will try more reply when I am
back home, but for the time being...

> From matpitka@pcu.helsinki.fi Tue Aug 17 00:46:51 1999
> Return-Path: <matpitka@pcu.helsinki.fi>
> Received: from rock.helsinki.fi (rock.helsinki.fi [128.214.3.50])
> by kitada.com (8.9.3/3.7W) with ESMTP id AAA01410;
> Tue, 17 Aug 1999 00:46:49 +0900
> by rock.helsinki.fi (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA21696;
> Mon, 16 Aug 1999 18:48:39 +0300 (EET DST)
> Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 18:48:39 +0300 (EET DST)
> From: Matti Pitkanen <matpitka@pcu.helsinki.fi>
> X-Sender: matpitka@rock.helsinki.fi
> Subject: Re: [time 537] Theory of cs should predict its own discovery
> Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.03.9908161832480.16880-100000@rock.helsinki.fi>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> Status: R
>
>
> --More--
> On Mon, 16 Aug 1999, Hitoshi Kitada wrote:
>
> > Dear Matti,
> >
> > > From matpitka@pcu.helsinki.fi Mon Aug 16 19:35:28 1999
> > > Return-Path: <matpitka@pcu.helsinki.fi>
> > > Received: from rock.helsinki.fi (rock.helsinki.fi [128.214.3.50])
> > > by kitada.com (8.9.3/3.7W) with ESMTP id TAA00922
> > > for <hitoshi@kitada.com>; Mon, 16 Aug 1999 19:35:26 +0900
> > > Received: from localhost (> > > Received: from localhost (matpitka@localhost)
> > > by rock.helsinki.fi (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA06472
> > > for <hitoshi@kitada.com>; Mon, 16 Aug 1999 13:37:14 +0300 (EET DST)
> > > Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 13:37:14 +0300 (EET DST)
> > > From: Matti Pitkanen <matpitka@pcu.helsinki.fi>
> > > X-Sender: matpitka@rock.helsinki.fi
> > > Subject: Re: [time 537] Theory of cs should predict its own discovery
> > > In-Reply-To: <000501bee5af$e64d0f80$0601a8c0@kitada.com>
> > > Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.03.9908161336500.6430-100000@rock.helsinki.fi>
> > > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> > > Status: R
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, 14 Aug 1999, Hitoshi Kitada wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dear Matti,
> > > >
> > > > Matti, do you understand Japanese or/and Asian mind?
> > >
> > > Well, you could answer this question best!
> >
> > My question should not be treated lightly like this. It is related
> > with the idea of my theory that you do not understand.
>
> Sorry. My intention was not to abuse. It is quite possible that I do
> not understand all ideas behind your theory. I however think I have
> reasonable grasp about how you glue general relativity and
> nonrelativistic QM. Also about the idea of LS. There are common elements
> and also some crucial differences in the basic philosophy.
> We simply have different belief systems! Having discussed in the net
> for 4-5 years I have learned that every (am I exaggerating?) thinker, with
> me included, is in the jail of his beliefs. The gist of the posting
> which inspired your question was in fact a little self irony inspired by
> this observation. The best we can do is to compare our thought constructs
> as as art rather than claims for final truth. At least in my case,
> the thought construct has changed so much during single year, that it
> would be unrealistic to regard it as anything final.

My recognition is that the western has not given any sufficient and
necessary concerns to Asian thoughts in spite of our intensive effort to
understand the western culture and mind for more than 130 years. My
thought on the present is that the rationalism is ending and is going to
be absorbed into a huge consecutive knowledge of experiences. Look at
physics. It lacks a logical consistency at any age. It is nothing but a
convenient system of knowledge that summarizes experiences so as to be
made that the remindings of the experinces are easy. No ratios in it. As
you say it is changing always even in a single mind. This means that
the rationalism is no more than a dream of the Modern Age. It cannot be
realized.

Our ancestors have recognized the limit of ratios several hundreds years
ago. They built a system of diffrentiation-integration theory on the
level of experienced calculus, and calculated a rather exact approximate
value for \pi almost at the same age as Newton-Leibniz. I am sure that
you do not know such history of our culture.

The westerners should know that science as a rationalism is ending. You
might mean the same thing by your statement:

> The best we can do is to compare our thought constructs
> as as art rather than claims for final truth. At least in my
> case, the thought construct has changed so much during single year,
> that it would be unrealistic to regard it as anything final.

dream of rationalism is ending.

Best,
Hitoshi

>
>
>
> With Best Regards,
> Matti
>
>
>

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Oct 16 1999 - 00:36:29 JST