From: "Ernest Lilley" <elilley at mindspring.com>
To: "'WSFA members'" <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Newton or einstein?
Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 22:51:47 -0400
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>

I think the bottom line is that we formed out reflexes in a basically
Newtonian world, though ironically if you ask most people to draw the arc of
a thrown ball they'll show you a straight line or something, but if you ask
them to catch the ball they'll have no problem. Greek physics follow this
line and make perfect sense if you don't have a stopwatch.

Exotic physics is all around us, from the big fusion power plant in the sky
to the lasers and semiconductors in most everything we put electricity
through. Since we don't deal with it directly, and since our perceptions
evolved under fairly limited conditions, leaving us with a lot of things
like enhanced green sensitivity, we first convert any phenomenon into
conventional stuff in order to deal with it.

I guess my point is, unless you happen to have an atomic bomb go off near
your house, that relativistic and quantum effects (nice catch Keith, I was
wondering how long it would take) don't add useful information to our
understanding of the environment. In fact, they lead you towards the dark
side...thinking that a reasonably deterministic system is really a random
one. Most of the time cause and effect are pretty easy to connect, but I
suspect that any number of people seek refuge in the notion that chaos rules
all...so why bother trying to figure anything out?

So, separating relativity and uncertainty, I'm not sure which I think is the
more damaging set of ideas; one that lead to the development of the atomic
bomb, or one that lead to the abandonment of rational thought.

Ernest Lilley

Home/Office: 703 371 0226
EJ: 757 581 4146
email: elilley at mindspring.com