#immanuelkant — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #immanuelkant, aggregated by home.social.
-
Sobre Deus, Descartes e o gênio maligno.
- bsoplvr
https://outraspalavras.net/crise-civilizatoria/sobre-deus-descartes-e-o-genio-maligno/
#CriseCivilizatria #Atesmo #Dogmatismoreligioso #Existencialismo #Freligiosa #Freud #ImmanuelKant #Razoabsoluta #RenDescartes -
For Critique of Judgement to be understood (apart from a lifetime) one needs to have first studied and understood (to a degree) the other two previous critiques?
-
A super interesting book looking at authors such as Kant and Goethe as precursors of thinking about the inorganic, which is a great and refreshingly oblique angle on the kind of things I was reading two years ago ("Kant's Organicism" by Jennifer Mensch for instance), and completely in line with the current (and still failing) crystal experiments.
(Many thanks @ueb_team161 for that great pointer !)#WolfgangHottner #ImmanuelKant #Goethe #79 #SystemsThatMatter
-
Vom Handeln wider besseres Wissen
Man könnte das Handeln wider besseres Wissen als das Grundübel der Moderne oder gar der Aufklärung bezeichnen, denn die Aufklärung stellt den Verstand in den Mittelpunkt des Menschseins, was ihn jedoch seit je her nicht davon abhält unvernünftig zu handeln. Es werden Rohstoffe verbraucht, als stünden sie unendlich zur Verfügung. Die Grenzen des Wachstums sind spätestens seit dem ersten Bericht des Club of Rome aus dem Jahr 1972 bekannt und doch wird so gelebt und gewirtschaftet, als gäbe es sie nicht und die natürlichen Ressourcen stünden unendlich zur Verfügung.
Das Coronavirus hat dem Planeten eine kleine Atempause verschafft. Der menschengemachte Klimawandel schreitet sichtbar voran, die Gletscher verschwinden. Das Polareis schmilzt und gleichwohl werden die Klimaziele Jahr für Jahr verfehlt. Eine Trendwende ist nicht in Sicht. Es werden Kriege geführt, die nur Verlierer kennen und dennoch findet niemand den Mut, sie zu beenden und denjenigen das Handwerk zu legen, die daran verdienen. Eine ohnmächtige UNO wird kaum noch von jemandem respektiert.
Wie schön, dass das Bundesministerium der Verteidigung auf seiner Website schreibt, dass sich die UN neben der Friedenserhaltung und der Kriegsprävention auch anderen Bereichen wie dem Kampf gegen Hunger und Armut sowie dem Schutz natürlicher Ressourcen widmen. Es klingt ein bisschen aus der Zeit gefallen. Bundeskanzler Merz widmete den UN in seiner Regierungserklärung am 18. März 2026 vor dem Treffen der europäischen Regierungschefs am 19./20. März 2026 in Brüssel denn auch keine Silbe. Vielleicht ist es an der Zeit, dass wir aufhören, uns etwas vorzumachen, wie Jonathan Franzen mit Blick auf die Klimakatastrophe 2020 in seinem gleichlautenden Essay rhetorisch fragte. Man muss nicht an eine nahende Apokalypse glauben, um diese Frage in diesen Tagen zu verallgemeinern.
Sapere aude, habe Mut, dich deines eigenen Verstandes zu bedienen, ist die zentrale Botschaft des großen deutschen Philosophen Immanuel Kant (22. April 1724 – 12. Februar 1804). Klar war allerdings zu seiner Zeit schon, dass der Verstand allein es nicht richten wird. Es bedurfte und bedarf eben auch Mut, um sich der rationalen Erkenntnis zu bedienen. Die KI-generierte Definition von Mut ist „die Fähigkeit, trotz Angst, Unsicherheit oder Risiken zu handeln und Herausforderungen anzunehmen, die einem wichtig sind. Es bedeutet, die Komfortzone zu verlassen, für eigene Überzeugungen einzustehen und ist eher ein überlegtes Handeln als Abwesenheit von Furcht. Mut ist trainierbar und stärkt das Selbstvertrauen.“ Alles nicht falsch, aber unvollständig.
Die Herausforderung wird dann besonders deutlich, wenn die rationale Erkenntnis zu Konflikten mit der herrschenden Ordnung und im persönlichen Bereich zu unbequemen Ergebnissen führt. Wenn ich gerne Wiener Schnitzel esse, sollte ich mir vielleicht keinen Kälbermaststall ansehen. Spätestens dann kommt nämlich eine andere Kategorie ins Spiel, die der Moral und mit ihr die persönlichen und gesellschaftlichen Wertvorstellungen. Ein weites Feld mit zahlreichen Tretminen. Eine beliebte Form dem auszuweichen ist die Entwicklung von Doppelmoral. Wasser predigen und Wein trinken (Heinrich Heine, Deutschland. Ein Wintermärchen, 1844)
Der Autor und Dramaturg Bernd Stegemann legt den Finger in die Wunde, wenn er die herrschende „Luxusüberzeugung“ als die gängige Moral anprangert, deren Verfechter nicht bereit sind, die persönlichen Konsequenzen ihrer Moralvorstellungen zu tragen (Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung, 7. März 2026).
Skepsis gegenüber augenfälliger Moral ist insbesondere in der Politik angebracht. Die schlimmsten Schreckensherrschaften sind im Namen hehrer Ziele etabliert worden. Von den Kreuzzügen über die Schreckensherrschaft der Jakobiner, Stalins Terrorregime, Hitlers Faschismus, die Roten Khmer, deren Terror rund 1,7 Mio. Menschen das Leben kostete, die „tugendhaften“ Taliban, Pinochets Folterknechte bis zu Putins „Spezialoperation“ in der Ukraine und Benjamin Netanjahus Vernichtungsfeldzug gegen die Palästinenser im Gaza. Die Liste wird lang und länger, wenn man ein bisschen darüber nachdenkt. Selbst die Grünen als einstige Friedenspartei (Frieden schaffen ohne Waffen) dürfen in dieser Reihe leider nicht unerwähnt bleiben, wenn sie im Chor mit Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann unermüdlich für die deutsche Rüstungsindustrie werben. Deutschland ist mit einem Weltmarktanteil von ca. 5,7% (2021–2025) der viertgrößte Waffenexporteur weltweit. Petra Kelly dürfte sich im Grab umdrehen.
Als die Menschen begannen, sich aus der laut Kant selbst verschuldeten Unmündigkeit zu befreien, begannen sie, immer perfekterer Waffen zu erfinden und sich ihrer zu bedienen, Reichtum völlig ungeniert auf Kosten anderer anzuhäufen, die Erde sich mit christlichem Ethos Untertan zu machen, Tiere als Mittel zum Zweck zu benutzen (bis 1990 galten sie im Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch als Sachen), das Wasser und die Luft zu vergiften und die schützende Hülle um unseren Planeten herum zu zerstören.
Was für ein Verstand ist das, der in zwei Weltkriegen mehr als 100 Millionen Tote nicht nur hinnimmt, sondern zum Zweck seines Handelns macht? Es drängt sich die Frage auf, was das Korrektiv der Moral wert ist. Der christliche Glaube hinderte die Amtskirchen jedenfalls nicht daran, sich mit dem Nationalsozialismus zu arrangieren. Der Film “The Zone of Interest” (2023) führt eindrücklich vor Augen, wie man ein paar hundert Metern von den Verbrennungsöfen entfernt „Stille Nacht, heilige Nacht“ singen kann.
Neben der Doppelmoral gibt es moralische Zwickmühlen, wie Michael J. Sandel anschaulich in seinem Buch über die Gerechtigkeit ausführt (Berlin 2013, S.34 ff.) Es gibt Situationen, die eine moralisch einwandfreie Antwort nicht zulassen. Entscheide ich mich für den Tod eines (unschuldigen) Menschen, wenn dadurch viele gerettet werden können? Keine einfach zu beantwortende Frage, wie die Beispiele von Sandel zeigen.
Brauchen wir einen neuen Thomas Hobbes (1588 – 1679), der in seiner Zeit unter dem Eindruck permanenter Kriege in Europa seine Theorie des Menschen als des Menschen Wolf entwickelte und daraus schlussfolgerte, dass nur ein starker Staat seine Bürger voreinander und vor äußeren Feinden schützen könne (Leviathan). Da geraten schnell andere Güter in unter die Räder, die Freiheit und die Menschenwürde.
In unsicheren Zeiten wächst die Bereitschaft, Freiheit zugunsten von vermeintlicher Sicherheit zu opfern. Autoritäre Regime und ihre Wegbereiter spielen auf diesem Klavier. Schreckliche Juristen wie Carl Schmitt und fürchterliche Philosophen wie Martin Heidegger liefern den theoretischen Überbau.
Wahrscheinlich hilft dagegen nur eine neue transnationale und demokratische Staatstheorie (und Praxis). Der kürzlich verstorbene Jürgen Habermas mit seinem unermüdlichen Plädoyer für ein starkes demokratisches Europa als Gegenmodell zu den libertären Fantasien eines Peter Thiel kommt einem in den Sinn, während andere Talkshow Philosophen dazu anscheinend wenig bis gar nichts zu sagen haben.
Was also tun?
Doppelmoral als solche zu bezeichnen, wo immer sie sichtbar wird. Sich ehrlich machen. Moralische Zwickmühlen nicht leugnen, sondern transparent damit umgehen. Unausweichliche Konflikte friedlich austragen und nicht unter den Teppich kehren. Kinder und Jugendliche stärken. In Bildung und Kultur investieren. Die Freiheit der Kunst respektieren, auch wenn man nicht einer Meinung ist, sich aber Fakten nicht als Meinung verkaufen zu lassen. Nicht resignieren. Im persönlichen Bereich die Kräfte konzentrieren, also vornehmlich das zu tun, was man liebt, worin man gut ist und was anderen nicht schadet, sondern möglichst nützt. Und Vorsicht vor der wohlfeilen pauschalen Forderung nach Bürokratieabbau, die gerade auf kaum einer politischen Agenda fehlt, denn wir erinnern uns, dass nur ein starker Staat den Wolf im Zaum hält.
Der Kampf gegen das Handeln wider besseres Wissen wird nicht ohne die Einbeziehung emotionalen Wissens auskommen. Hier dürften auch die Grenzen künstlicher Intelligenz deutlich werden, die neben dem Bürokratieabbau als Wundermittel zur Bewältigung der Zukunftsaufgaben gepriesen wird. Eine KI generierte Definition des Handelns wider besseres Wissen bezeichnet es als Willensschwäche, wenn man trotz Kenntnis, dass eine Handlung falsch, unvernünftig oder schädlich ist, sich für sie entscheidet. Na, also. Das eröffnet neue Perspektiven für den Einsatz von KI im politischen Willensbildungsprozess, vielleicht auch in der internationalen Diplomatie, wenn es um Wege zur Beendigung irrsinniger Kriege geht. Frag doch einfach mal bei ChatGPT nach Wegen zur Beendigung des Krieges im Nahen Osten.
Über Dr. Hanspeter Knirsch (Gastautor):
Der Autor ist Rechtsanwalt in Emsdetten und ehemaliger Bundesvorsitzender der Deutschen Jungdemokraten. Er gehörte in seiner Funktion als Vorsitzender der Jungdemokraten dem Bundesvorstand der F.D.P. an und war gewähltes Mitglied des Landesvorstands der F.D.P. in NRW bis zu seinem Austritt anlässlich des Koalitionswechsels 1982. Mehr zum Autor lesen sie hier.
Sie können dem Autor auch im Fediverse folgen unter: @hans.peter.knirsch -
Israel says it killed a senior official and the head of Iran’s internal security service
DUBA…
#NewsBeep #News #BreakingNews #AliKhamenei #AliLarijani #BenjaminNetanyahu #breakingnews #Diplomacy #DonaldTrump #Energyindustry #Fires #Generalnews #ImmanuelKant #Iran #Irangovernment #iranwar #Islam #Israel #Israelgovernment #MIDEASTWARS #MohammadJavad #Politicalandcivilunrest #Protestsanddemonstrations #QassemSoleimani #Sanctionsandembargoes #Warandunrest #Worldnews
https://www.newsbeep.com/439121/ -
Nach dem Staat zu rufen halte ich für verfehlt! Um bei Ihrem Beispiel der Pizza und dem leckeren Hafermüsli zu bleiben: soll der Staat vorschreiben ob wir Pizza (und wenn ja wie viele) wir essen dürfen, oder wie viel Müsli es zu sein hat?
Ich denke: nein!
Die Tendenz zur Delegation von Verantwortung zieht sich durch alle Lebensbereiche. Das war früher nicht anders.
Ich erinnere an Immanuel Kants Satz "Habe Mut dich deines eigenen Verstandes zu bedienen".
Er schrieb damals (1783):
"Aufklärung ist der Ausgang des Menschen aus seiner selbstverschuldeten Unmündigkeit. Unmündigkeit ist das Unvermögen, sich seines Verstandes ohne Leitung eines anderen zu bedienen.
Selbstverschuldet ist diese Unmündigkeit, wenn die Ursache derselben nicht am Mangel des Verstandes, sondern der Entschließung und des Mutes liegt, sich seiner ohne Leitung eines anderen zu bedienen. "
#kant #immanuelkant #sapereaude #verstand #anarchismus #montag #deutschland #mut #unmundig #unmundigkeit #staat #politik
-
Nach dem Staat zu rufen halte ich für verfehlt! Um bei Ihrem Beispiel der Pizza und dem leckeren Hafermüsli zu bleiben: soll der Staat vorschreiben ob wir Pizza (und wenn ja wie viele) wir essen dürfen, oder wie viel Müsli es zu sein hat?
Ich denke: nein!
Die Tendenz zur Delegation von Verantwortung zieht sich durch alle Lebensbereiche. Das war früher nicht anders.
Ich erinnere an Immanuel Kants Satz "Habe Mut dich deines eigenen Verstandes zu bedienen".
Er schrieb damals (1783):
"Aufklärung ist der Ausgang des Menschen aus seiner selbstverschuldeten Unmündigkeit. Unmündigkeit ist das Unvermögen, sich seines Verstandes ohne Leitung eines anderen zu bedienen.
Selbstverschuldet ist diese Unmündigkeit, wenn die Ursache derselben nicht am Mangel des Verstandes, sondern der Entschließung und des Mutes liegt, sich seiner ohne Leitung eines anderen zu bedienen. "
#kant #immanuelkant #sapereaude #verstand #anarchismus #montag #deutschland #mut #unmundig #unmundigkeit #staat #politik
-
Nach dem Staat zu rufen halte ich für verfehlt! Um bei Ihrem Beispiel der Pizza und dem leckeren Hafermüsli zu bleiben: soll der Staat vorschreiben ob wir Pizza (und wenn ja wie viele) wir essen dürfen, oder wie viel Müsli es zu sein hat?
Ich denke: nein!
Die Tendenz zur Delegation von Verantwortung zieht sich durch alle Lebensbereiche. Das war früher nicht anders.
Ich erinnere an Immanuel Kants Satz "Habe Mut dich deines eigenen Verstandes zu bedienen".
Er schrieb damals (1783):
"Aufklärung ist der Ausgang des Menschen aus seiner selbstverschuldeten Unmündigkeit. Unmündigkeit ist das Unvermögen, sich seines Verstandes ohne Leitung eines anderen zu bedienen.
Selbstverschuldet ist diese Unmündigkeit, wenn die Ursache derselben nicht am Mangel des Verstandes, sondern der Entschließung und des Mutes liegt, sich seiner ohne Leitung eines anderen zu bedienen. "
#kant #immanuelkant #sapereaude #verstand #anarchismus #montag #deutschland #mut #unmundig #unmundigkeit #staat #politik
-
How do planetary systems form around stars?
This article I think goes some way in explaining where we are at with that question right now.
This sort of thing was my introduction to Immanuel Kant, as he thought about exoplanets too.https://www.quantamagazine.org/how-are-planets-made-new-theories-are-taking-shape-20220609/
#Space #Astronomy #Philosophy #ImmanuelKant #Astrodon #Science #Exoplanets
-
“A descoberta de Kant sobre o tempo e o espaço pode ser considerada uma das mais importantes da história da humanidade.”
#resenhanarede
#resenha
#Kant
#filosofia
#ImmanuelKant
#críticadarazãopura
#Einstein
#Blake
#relatividade
#espaço
#tempo
#espaçotempo
#Deus -
Was heißt Aufklärung heute?
Nachtstudio, ZDF, 2012
Gäste:
Volker Panzer
Manfred Geier
Heiner Geißler
Sybille Krämer#nachststudio #aufklärung #philosophie #zdf #religion #talkshow #immanuelkant
-
Dazu als Ergänzunge Immanuel Kant:
"Aufklärung ist der Ausgang des Menschen aus seiner selbstverschuldeten Unmündigkeit.
Unmündigkeit ist das Unvermögen, sich seines Verstandes ohne Leitung eines anderen zu bedienen.
Selbstverschuldet ist diese Unmündigkeit, wenn die Ursache derselben nicht am Mangel des Verstandes, sondern der Entschließung und des Mutes liegt, sich seiner ohne Leitung eines anderen zu bedienen. (...)
Faulheit und Feigheit sind die Ursachen, warum ein so großer Teil der Menschen, nachdem sie die Natur längst von fremder Leitung freigesprochen hat dennoch gerne zeitlebens unmündig bleiben..."
Selbstverschuldet! Faulheit! Feigheit!
#kant #aufklarung #ImmanuelKant #faulheit #Feigheit #sapereaude #unmundigkeit #sonntag
-
Liberalism’s enduring tension between promoting progress and safeguarding freedom is visible in foreign aid, where well-intentioned experts often undermine dignity and self-determination by assuming they know best. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/commentary/2025/12/23/world/the-history-of-enlightened-oppression/?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=mastodon #commentary #worldnews #adamsmith #immanuelkant #johnstuartmill #marquisdecondorcet #liberalism #colonialism #foreignaid #hunger #sdg #development
-
Science is organized knowledge. Wisdom is organized life.
-- Immanuel Kant -
“Show, don’t tell”*…
Some things are very difficult to explain using words alone; they require physical demonstration. Consider, for example, the distinction between right and left. It turns out that this difficulty has been at the heart of the great scientific debates about the nature of space…
… explain right and left to a friend using language alone and without using the words right and left. As you can only use language, you can’t show your hands or use pictures!
It’s tricky, isn’t it? The difference between right and left isn’t as straightforward as it seems. If we dig a little deeper, we will find that the science behind right and left is surprising, complex, and profound.
How can two things be identical yet different at the same time? This was the question that puzzled one of humankind’s greatest thinkers, Immanuel Kant.
Many of the great debates of the Scientific Revolution during the 16th and 17th centuries concerned the nature of space. The English polymath Sir Isaac Newton proposed that space was absolute: space is an entity in itself and exists even without objects, matter, or living beings filling it.
In contrast, Gottfried Leibniz, Newton’s bitter rival, argued that space was relational: it only existed because of the relations between the objects that fill it. If objects do not exist, then space doesn’t either.
Meanwhile, Immanuel Kant used handedness to give his two cents. He asked us to imagine a solitary hand floating in an otherwise completely empty space. The hand must either be a right hand or a left hand, and this will be the case even in a space where no relationships between objects can be observed. Kant noted that our hands are geometrically and mathematically identical in every way possible, whether it be the lengths of the fingers or the angles between them. Yet, the one fundamental difference between them—that one is a right hand, and the other is a left hand—exists in itself; it is intrinsic to the hand and not related to any other object, similar to space itself. Space has an absolute property.
Ultimately, Kant’s theories of handedness were not foolproof and could not be used to prove that space is absolute. Indeed, Kant would switch between the Newtonian and Leibnizian schools of thought during his lifetime. However, Kant did show just how puzzling and difficult it is to explain why right hands and left hands are identical but different. That intrinsic quality of handedness is almost impossible to explain without showing, and this is the root of the Ozma Problem.
In 1960, Project Ozma was launched in West Virginia. Named after the ruler of the fictional Land of Oz, Project Ozma was a huge telescope that listened for signals from space, signals that could be proof of extraterrestrial intelligence. Unfortunately, the project only ran for a few months, and it had no major success.
Let’s say the telescope had picked up these signals. How would we on Earth respond? We would need to convert their signals, after which we would send our own. Telescopes and computers use binary code. And directionality is crucial to understanding binary, as it is read left to right and decoded right to left. So, if we are sending binary signals to aliens, we need to be sure they understand which direction is left and which is right. How can we be sure they share our understanding of directions?
This is the Ozma Problem, a thought experiment first described by Martin Gardner [see the almanac entry here] in his 1964 book, The Ambidextrous Universe. In this book, Gardner pitched a number of solutions.
Before going into Gardner’s work, here’s a seemingly simple solution: lay your palms face down on a table and equally spaced from your body. The thumb that’s closer to your heart? That’s the left side. The right side is defined by the thumb farther away from the heart.
Another potential solution would be to use north and south as reference points: when facing north, everything towards east is the right side, and everything pointing west is the left side.
The problem with these solutions is that they both rely on a shared point of reference, like the direction of north-south-east-west and the location of the heart. In no way can we be certain that an alien species would share these!
Some of the solutions that Gardner proposed in his book use magnetic fields, planetary rotation, and the direction of current flow. And as we discussed before, they all fail because of the need for a shared point of reference.
So, after centuries of wondering whether we are alone in the universe, we finally make contact with an alien species, only to find that our inability to explain something as mundane as right and left precludes meaningful dialogue. The Ozma Problem demonstrates the limits of our language, and it challenges anthropocentrism, which is the notion that human beings and our experiences are the center of the universe.
Many thought problems are hypothetical and can’t be solved, but the Ozma Problem does have a solution. In fact, the solution already existed when Gardner first described it. But it’s not immediately associated with right-left asymmetry or aliens.
While we cannot be sure that aliens share our anatomy or our perception of north-south-east-west, if they inhabit the same universe as us, we can assume the fundamental forces of physics apply to them too.
There are four fundamental forces of physics: gravity, electromagnetism, strong nuclear forces (the force that binds atomic nuclei together), and weak nuclear forces (the force that causes atomic decay).
Up until 1956, it was assumed these fundamental forces all display parity. Parity is an important concept in physics, and it can be demonstrated visually by using a mirror. If we stand in front of a mirror holding an apple in our right hand and then drop it, the reflection will show it falling to the ground, but the apple will fall from your left hand. Gravity still works in the reflection. Likewise, if we look at the strong forces binding atomic nuclei and then observe them in a mirror, the images would be identical, just with right and left switched.
But in 1956, Professor Chien-Shiung Wu, a physicist, conducted a ground breaking experiment. She was able to prove that the weak nuclear force—the decay of atoms—did not always demonstrate parity. The weak nuclear force does not adhere to mirror symmetry.
Professor Wu showed this by observing the decay of cobalt-60 atoms. When atoms decay, they spin out electrons. Up until then, scientists had always observed these electrons spinning out equally in all directions. But Professor Wu saw that cobalt-60 will always preferentially spin out electrons in a certain direction. In other words, the movement is asymmetric. For some reason, the decay of atoms is the one fundamental force that does not adhere to parity or mirror symmetry, thus showing that directionality is intrinsic to the universe, just as Kant had postulated in the 18th century.
For the first time in history, it was proven that nature can prefer one direction. Very soon after Wu’s findings, physicists were able to prove that elementary particles known as neutrinos always spin towards the left.
What does this mean for our communication with aliens? If the aliens can replicate Professor Wu’s experiment and visualize the spin of electrons while cobalt-60 decays, they can orient right and left!
Ironically, Professor Wu was not afforded any sort of parity herself during her working life. Other scientists were recognized for research that could not have been achieved without hers. Today, the weak force remains one of the most important and mysterious topics in physics today, thanks to Professor Wu.
So, if the only way to scientifically and definitively define the difference between right and left is to build a particle accelerator and observe the decay of cobalt-60, clearly the difference is not as straightforward as it may first seem! The Ozma Problem is proof that the most mundane concepts are sometimes directly linked to the cosmos and speak to the nature of existence itself…
An essay by Dr. Maloy Das (see the bio in this unrelated– but also fascinating– article by him). From the remarkable blog, Fascinating World, scored a highly credible source by the MBFC for having proper sourcing, no failed fact-checks, and “highly factual” reporting. It’s the work of Krishna Rathuryan, currently a senior at a prep school in Princeton (where he’s also apparently a pretty accomplished distance runner) and team of his friends.
When language fails: “What Is The Ozma Problem, And Why Does It Matter?“
* attributed to playwright Anton Chekhov, who said said “Don’t tell me the moon is shining; show me the glint of light on broken glass.” It has, of course, become a motto for many writers across genre.
###
As we explore explanation, we (especially any readers in or near Manhattan Beach, California) might note that today is one of the two days of the year (symmetrically on either side of the winter solstice, 37 days before and 37 after) when the public sculpture there, “Light Gate,” becomes a portal “unlocked” by the rays of the setting sun… as Atlas Obscura puts it, “a bit of Druidic paganism by way of high modern design.”
#antonChekhov #chekhov #chekov #culture #gottfriedLeibniz #history #immanuelKant #issacNewton #kant #language #lightGate #manhattanBeach #ozma #ozmaProblem #philosophy #science #technology
-
“Show, don’t tell”*…
Some things are very difficult to explain using words alone; they require physical demonstration. Consider, for example, the distinction between right and left. It turns out that this difficulty has been at the heart of the great scientific debates about the nature of space…
… explain right and left to a friend using language alone and without using the words right and left. As you can only use language, you can’t show your hands or use pictures!
It’s tricky, isn’t it? The difference between right and left isn’t as straightforward as it seems. If we dig a little deeper, we will find that the science behind right and left is surprising, complex, and profound.
How can two things be identical yet different at the same time? This was the question that puzzled one of humankind’s greatest thinkers, Immanuel Kant.
Many of the great debates of the Scientific Revolution during the 16th and 17th centuries concerned the nature of space. The English polymath Sir Isaac Newton proposed that space was absolute: space is an entity in itself and exists even without objects, matter, or living beings filling it.
In contrast, Gottfried Leibniz, Newton’s bitter rival, argued that space was relational: it only existed because of the relations between the objects that fill it. If objects do not exist, then space doesn’t either.
Meanwhile, Immanuel Kant used handedness to give his two cents. He asked us to imagine a solitary hand floating in an otherwise completely empty space. The hand must either be a right hand or a left hand, and this will be the case even in a space where no relationships between objects can be observed. Kant noted that our hands are geometrically and mathematically identical in every way possible, whether it be the lengths of the fingers or the angles between them. Yet, the one fundamental difference between them—that one is a right hand, and the other is a left hand—exists in itself; it is intrinsic to the hand and not related to any other object, similar to space itself. Space has an absolute property.
Ultimately, Kant’s theories of handedness were not foolproof and could not be used to prove that space is absolute. Indeed, Kant would switch between the Newtonian and Leibnizian schools of thought during his lifetime. However, Kant did show just how puzzling and difficult it is to explain why right hands and left hands are identical but different. That intrinsic quality of handedness is almost impossible to explain without showing, and this is the root of the Ozma Problem.
In 1960, Project Ozma was launched in West Virginia. Named after the ruler of the fictional Land of Oz, Project Ozma was a huge telescope that listened for signals from space, signals that could be proof of extraterrestrial intelligence. Unfortunately, the project only ran for a few months, and it had no major success.
Let’s say the telescope had picked up these signals. How would we on Earth respond? We would need to convert their signals, after which we would send our own. Telescopes and computers use binary code. And directionality is crucial to understanding binary, as it is read left to right and decoded right to left. So, if we are sending binary signals to aliens, we need to be sure they understand which direction is left and which is right. How can we be sure they share our understanding of directions?
This is the Ozma Problem, a thought experiment first described by Martin Gardner [see the almanac entry here] in his 1964 book, The Ambidextrous Universe. In this book, Gardner pitched a number of solutions.
Before going into Gardner’s work, here’s a seemingly simple solution: lay your palms face down on a table and equally spaced from your body. The thumb that’s closer to your heart? That’s the left side. The right side is defined by the thumb farther away from the heart.
Another potential solution would be to use north and south as reference points: when facing north, everything towards east is the right side, and everything pointing west is the left side.
The problem with these solutions is that they both rely on a shared point of reference, like the direction of north-south-east-west and the location of the heart. In no way can we be certain that an alien species would share these!
Some of the solutions that Gardner proposed in his book use magnetic fields, planetary rotation, and the direction of current flow. And as we discussed before, they all fail because of the need for a shared point of reference.
So, after centuries of wondering whether we are alone in the universe, we finally make contact with an alien species, only to find that our inability to explain something as mundane as right and left precludes meaningful dialogue. The Ozma Problem demonstrates the limits of our language, and it challenges anthropocentrism, which is the notion that human beings and our experiences are the center of the universe.
Many thought problems are hypothetical and can’t be solved, but the Ozma Problem does have a solution. In fact, the solution already existed when Gardner first described it. But it’s not immediately associated with right-left asymmetry or aliens.
While we cannot be sure that aliens share our anatomy or our perception of north-south-east-west, if they inhabit the same universe as us, we can assume the fundamental forces of physics apply to them too.
There are four fundamental forces of physics: gravity, electromagnetism, strong nuclear forces (the force that binds atomic nuclei together), and weak nuclear forces (the force that causes atomic decay).
Up until 1956, it was assumed these fundamental forces all display parity. Parity is an important concept in physics, and it can be demonstrated visually by using a mirror. If we stand in front of a mirror holding an apple in our right hand and then drop it, the reflection will show it falling to the ground, but the apple will fall from your left hand. Gravity still works in the reflection. Likewise, if we look at the strong forces binding atomic nuclei and then observe them in a mirror, the images would be identical, just with right and left switched.
But in 1956, Professor Chien-Shiung Wu, a physicist, conducted a ground breaking experiment. She was able to prove that the weak nuclear force—the decay of atoms—did not always demonstrate parity. The weak nuclear force does not adhere to mirror symmetry.
Professor Wu showed this by observing the decay of cobalt-60 atoms. When atoms decay, they spin out electrons. Up until then, scientists had always observed these electrons spinning out equally in all directions. But Professor Wu saw that cobalt-60 will always preferentially spin out electrons in a certain direction. In other words, the movement is asymmetric. For some reason, the decay of atoms is the one fundamental force that does not adhere to parity or mirror symmetry, thus showing that directionality is intrinsic to the universe, just as Kant had postulated in the 18th century.
For the first time in history, it was proven that nature can prefer one direction. Very soon after Wu’s findings, physicists were able to prove that elementary particles known as neutrinos always spin towards the left.
What does this mean for our communication with aliens? If the aliens can replicate Professor Wu’s experiment and visualize the spin of electrons while cobalt-60 decays, they can orient right and left!
Ironically, Professor Wu was not afforded any sort of parity herself during her working life. Other scientists were recognized for research that could not have been achieved without hers. Today, the weak force remains one of the most important and mysterious topics in physics today, thanks to Professor Wu.
So, if the only way to scientifically and definitively define the difference between right and left is to build a particle accelerator and observe the decay of cobalt-60, clearly the difference is not as straightforward as it may first seem! The Ozma Problem is proof that the most mundane concepts are sometimes directly linked to the cosmos and speak to the nature of existence itself…
An essay by Dr. Maloy Das (see the bio in this unrelated– but also fascinating– article by him). From the remarkable blog, Fascinating World, scored a highly credible source by the MBFC for having proper sourcing, no failed fact-checks, and “highly factual” reporting. It’s the work of Krishna Rathuryan, currently a senior at a prep school in Princeton (where he’s also apparently a pretty accomplished distance runner) and team of his friends.
When language fails: “What Is The Ozma Problem, And Why Does It Matter?“
* attributed to playwright Anton Chekhov, who said said “Don’t tell me the moon is shining; show me the glint of light on broken glass.” It has, of course, become a motto for many writers across genre.
###
As we explore explanation, we (especially any readers in or near Manhattan Beach, California) might note that today is one of the two days of the year (symmetrically on either side of the winter solstice, 37 days before and 37 after) when the public sculpture there, “Light Gate,” becomes a portal “unlocked” by the rays of the setting sun… as Atlas Obscura puts it, “a bit of Druidic paganism by way of high modern design.”
#antonChekhov #chekhov #chekov #culture #gottfriedLeibniz #history #immanuelKant #issacNewton #kant #language #lightGate #manhattanBeach #ozma #ozmaProblem #philosophy #science #technology
-
“Show, don’t tell”*…
Some things are very difficult to explain using words alone; they require physical demonstration. Consider, for example, the distinction between right and left. It turns out that this difficulty has been at the heart of the great scientific debates about the nature of space…
… explain right and left to a friend using language alone and without using the words right and left. As you can only use language, you can’t show your hands or use pictures!
It’s tricky, isn’t it? The difference between right and left isn’t as straightforward as it seems. If we dig a little deeper, we will find that the science behind right and left is surprising, complex, and profound.
How can two things be identical yet different at the same time? This was the question that puzzled one of humankind’s greatest thinkers, Immanuel Kant.
Many of the great debates of the Scientific Revolution during the 16th and 17th centuries concerned the nature of space. The English polymath Sir Isaac Newton proposed that space was absolute: space is an entity in itself and exists even without objects, matter, or living beings filling it.
In contrast, Gottfried Leibniz, Newton’s bitter rival, argued that space was relational: it only existed because of the relations between the objects that fill it. If objects do not exist, then space doesn’t either.
Meanwhile, Immanuel Kant used handedness to give his two cents. He asked us to imagine a solitary hand floating in an otherwise completely empty space. The hand must either be a right hand or a left hand, and this will be the case even in a space where no relationships between objects can be observed. Kant noted that our hands are geometrically and mathematically identical in every way possible, whether it be the lengths of the fingers or the angles between them. Yet, the one fundamental difference between them—that one is a right hand, and the other is a left hand—exists in itself; it is intrinsic to the hand and not related to any other object, similar to space itself. Space has an absolute property.
Ultimately, Kant’s theories of handedness were not foolproof and could not be used to prove that space is absolute. Indeed, Kant would switch between the Newtonian and Leibnizian schools of thought during his lifetime. However, Kant did show just how puzzling and difficult it is to explain why right hands and left hands are identical but different. That intrinsic quality of handedness is almost impossible to explain without showing, and this is the root of the Ozma Problem.
In 1960, Project Ozma was launched in West Virginia. Named after the ruler of the fictional Land of Oz, Project Ozma was a huge telescope that listened for signals from space, signals that could be proof of extraterrestrial intelligence. Unfortunately, the project only ran for a few months, and it had no major success.
Let’s say the telescope had picked up these signals. How would we on Earth respond? We would need to convert their signals, after which we would send our own. Telescopes and computers use binary code. And directionality is crucial to understanding binary, as it is read left to right and decoded right to left. So, if we are sending binary signals to aliens, we need to be sure they understand which direction is left and which is right. How can we be sure they share our understanding of directions?
This is the Ozma Problem, a thought experiment first described by Martin Gardner [see the almanac entry here] in his 1964 book, The Ambidextrous Universe. In this book, Gardner pitched a number of solutions.
Before going into Gardner’s work, here’s a seemingly simple solution: lay your palms face down on a table and equally spaced from your body. The thumb that’s closer to your heart? That’s the left side. The right side is defined by the thumb farther away from the heart.
Another potential solution would be to use north and south as reference points: when facing north, everything towards east is the right side, and everything pointing west is the left side.
The problem with these solutions is that they both rely on a shared point of reference, like the direction of north-south-east-west and the location of the heart. In no way can we be certain that an alien species would share these!
Some of the solutions that Gardner proposed in his book use magnetic fields, planetary rotation, and the direction of current flow. And as we discussed before, they all fail because of the need for a shared point of reference.
So, after centuries of wondering whether we are alone in the universe, we finally make contact with an alien species, only to find that our inability to explain something as mundane as right and left precludes meaningful dialogue. The Ozma Problem demonstrates the limits of our language, and it challenges anthropocentrism, which is the notion that human beings and our experiences are the center of the universe.
Many thought problems are hypothetical and can’t be solved, but the Ozma Problem does have a solution. In fact, the solution already existed when Gardner first described it. But it’s not immediately associated with right-left asymmetry or aliens.
While we cannot be sure that aliens share our anatomy or our perception of north-south-east-west, if they inhabit the same universe as us, we can assume the fundamental forces of physics apply to them too.
There are four fundamental forces of physics: gravity, electromagnetism, strong nuclear forces (the force that binds atomic nuclei together), and weak nuclear forces (the force that causes atomic decay).
Up until 1956, it was assumed these fundamental forces all display parity. Parity is an important concept in physics, and it can be demonstrated visually by using a mirror. If we stand in front of a mirror holding an apple in our right hand and then drop it, the reflection will show it falling to the ground, but the apple will fall from your left hand. Gravity still works in the reflection. Likewise, if we look at the strong forces binding atomic nuclei and then observe them in a mirror, the images would be identical, just with right and left switched.
But in 1956, Professor Chien-Shiung Wu, a physicist, conducted a ground breaking experiment. She was able to prove that the weak nuclear force—the decay of atoms—did not always demonstrate parity. The weak nuclear force does not adhere to mirror symmetry.
Professor Wu showed this by observing the decay of cobalt-60 atoms. When atoms decay, they spin out electrons. Up until then, scientists had always observed these electrons spinning out equally in all directions. But Professor Wu saw that cobalt-60 will always preferentially spin out electrons in a certain direction. In other words, the movement is asymmetric. For some reason, the decay of atoms is the one fundamental force that does not adhere to parity or mirror symmetry, thus showing that directionality is intrinsic to the universe, just as Kant had postulated in the 18th century.
For the first time in history, it was proven that nature can prefer one direction. Very soon after Wu’s findings, physicists were able to prove that elementary particles known as neutrinos always spin towards the left.
What does this mean for our communication with aliens? If the aliens can replicate Professor Wu’s experiment and visualize the spin of electrons while cobalt-60 decays, they can orient right and left!
Ironically, Professor Wu was not afforded any sort of parity herself during her working life. Other scientists were recognized for research that could not have been achieved without hers. Today, the weak force remains one of the most important and mysterious topics in physics today, thanks to Professor Wu.
So, if the only way to scientifically and definitively define the difference between right and left is to build a particle accelerator and observe the decay of cobalt-60, clearly the difference is not as straightforward as it may first seem! The Ozma Problem is proof that the most mundane concepts are sometimes directly linked to the cosmos and speak to the nature of existence itself…
An essay by Dr. Maloy Das (see the bio in this unrelated– but also fascinating– article by him). From the remarkable blog, Fascinating World, scored a highly credible source by the MBFC for having proper sourcing, no failed fact-checks, and “highly factual” reporting. It’s the work of Krishna Rathuryan, currently a senior at a prep school in Princeton (where he’s also apparently a pretty accomplished distance runner) and team of his friends.
When language fails: “What Is The Ozma Problem, And Why Does It Matter?“
* attributed to playwright Anton Chekhov, who said said “Don’t tell me the moon is shining; show me the glint of light on broken glass.” It has, of course, become a motto for many writers across genre.
###
As we explore explanation, we (especially any readers in or near Manhattan Beach, California) might note that today is one of the two days of the year (symmetrically on either side of the winter solstice, 37 days before and 37 after) when the public sculpture there, “Light Gate,” becomes a portal “unlocked” by the rays of the setting sun… as Atlas Obscura puts it, “a bit of Druidic paganism by way of high modern design.”
#antonChekhov #chekhov #chekov #culture #gottfriedLeibniz #history #immanuelKant #issacNewton #kant #language #lightGate #manhattanBeach #ozma #ozmaProblem #philosophy #science #technology
-
“Show, don’t tell”*…
Some things are very difficult to explain using words alone; they require physical demonstration. Consider, for example, the distinction between right and left. It turns out that this difficulty has been at the heart of the great scientific debates about the nature of space…
… explain right and left to a friend using language alone and without using the words right and left. As you can only use language, you can’t show your hands or use pictures!
It’s tricky, isn’t it? The difference between right and left isn’t as straightforward as it seems. If we dig a little deeper, we will find that the science behind right and left is surprising, complex, and profound.
How can two things be identical yet different at the same time? This was the question that puzzled one of humankind’s greatest thinkers, Immanuel Kant.
Many of the great debates of the Scientific Revolution during the 16th and 17th centuries concerned the nature of space. The English polymath Sir Isaac Newton proposed that space was absolute: space is an entity in itself and exists even without objects, matter, or living beings filling it.
In contrast, Gottfried Leibniz, Newton’s bitter rival, argued that space was relational: it only existed because of the relations between the objects that fill it. If objects do not exist, then space doesn’t either.
Meanwhile, Immanuel Kant used handedness to give his two cents. He asked us to imagine a solitary hand floating in an otherwise completely empty space. The hand must either be a right hand or a left hand, and this will be the case even in a space where no relationships between objects can be observed. Kant noted that our hands are geometrically and mathematically identical in every way possible, whether it be the lengths of the fingers or the angles between them. Yet, the one fundamental difference between them—that one is a right hand, and the other is a left hand—exists in itself; it is intrinsic to the hand and not related to any other object, similar to space itself. Space has an absolute property.
Ultimately, Kant’s theories of handedness were not foolproof and could not be used to prove that space is absolute. Indeed, Kant would switch between the Newtonian and Leibnizian schools of thought during his lifetime. However, Kant did show just how puzzling and difficult it is to explain why right hands and left hands are identical but different. That intrinsic quality of handedness is almost impossible to explain without showing, and this is the root of the Ozma Problem.
In 1960, Project Ozma was launched in West Virginia. Named after the ruler of the fictional Land of Oz, Project Ozma was a huge telescope that listened for signals from space, signals that could be proof of extraterrestrial intelligence. Unfortunately, the project only ran for a few months, and it had no major success.
Let’s say the telescope had picked up these signals. How would we on Earth respond? We would need to convert their signals, after which we would send our own. Telescopes and computers use binary code. And directionality is crucial to understanding binary, as it is read left to right and decoded right to left. So, if we are sending binary signals to aliens, we need to be sure they understand which direction is left and which is right. How can we be sure they share our understanding of directions?
This is the Ozma Problem, a thought experiment first described by Martin Gardner [see the almanac entry here] in his 1964 book, The Ambidextrous Universe. In this book, Gardner pitched a number of solutions.
Before going into Gardner’s work, here’s a seemingly simple solution: lay your palms face down on a table and equally spaced from your body. The thumb that’s closer to your heart? That’s the left side. The right side is defined by the thumb farther away from the heart.
Another potential solution would be to use north and south as reference points: when facing north, everything towards east is the right side, and everything pointing west is the left side.
The problem with these solutions is that they both rely on a shared point of reference, like the direction of north-south-east-west and the location of the heart. In no way can we be certain that an alien species would share these!
Some of the solutions that Gardner proposed in his book use magnetic fields, planetary rotation, and the direction of current flow. And as we discussed before, they all fail because of the need for a shared point of reference.
So, after centuries of wondering whether we are alone in the universe, we finally make contact with an alien species, only to find that our inability to explain something as mundane as right and left precludes meaningful dialogue. The Ozma Problem demonstrates the limits of our language, and it challenges anthropocentrism, which is the notion that human beings and our experiences are the center of the universe.
Many thought problems are hypothetical and can’t be solved, but the Ozma Problem does have a solution. In fact, the solution already existed when Gardner first described it. But it’s not immediately associated with right-left asymmetry or aliens.
While we cannot be sure that aliens share our anatomy or our perception of north-south-east-west, if they inhabit the same universe as us, we can assume the fundamental forces of physics apply to them too.
There are four fundamental forces of physics: gravity, electromagnetism, strong nuclear forces (the force that binds atomic nuclei together), and weak nuclear forces (the force that causes atomic decay).
Up until 1956, it was assumed these fundamental forces all display parity. Parity is an important concept in physics, and it can be demonstrated visually by using a mirror. If we stand in front of a mirror holding an apple in our right hand and then drop it, the reflection will show it falling to the ground, but the apple will fall from your left hand. Gravity still works in the reflection. Likewise, if we look at the strong forces binding atomic nuclei and then observe them in a mirror, the images would be identical, just with right and left switched.
But in 1956, Professor Chien-Shiung Wu, a physicist, conducted a ground breaking experiment. She was able to prove that the weak nuclear force—the decay of atoms—did not always demonstrate parity. The weak nuclear force does not adhere to mirror symmetry.
Professor Wu showed this by observing the decay of cobalt-60 atoms. When atoms decay, they spin out electrons. Up until then, scientists had always observed these electrons spinning out equally in all directions. But Professor Wu saw that cobalt-60 will always preferentially spin out electrons in a certain direction. In other words, the movement is asymmetric. For some reason, the decay of atoms is the one fundamental force that does not adhere to parity or mirror symmetry, thus showing that directionality is intrinsic to the universe, just as Kant had postulated in the 18th century.
For the first time in history, it was proven that nature can prefer one direction. Very soon after Wu’s findings, physicists were able to prove that elementary particles known as neutrinos always spin towards the left.
What does this mean for our communication with aliens? If the aliens can replicate Professor Wu’s experiment and visualize the spin of electrons while cobalt-60 decays, they can orient right and left!
Ironically, Professor Wu was not afforded any sort of parity herself during her working life. Other scientists were recognized for research that could not have been achieved without hers. Today, the weak force remains one of the most important and mysterious topics in physics today, thanks to Professor Wu.
So, if the only way to scientifically and definitively define the difference between right and left is to build a particle accelerator and observe the decay of cobalt-60, clearly the difference is not as straightforward as it may first seem! The Ozma Problem is proof that the most mundane concepts are sometimes directly linked to the cosmos and speak to the nature of existence itself…
An essay by Dr. Maloy Das (see the bio in this unrelated– but also fascinating– article by him). From the remarkable blog, Fascinating World, scored a highly credible source by the MBFC for having proper sourcing, no failed fact-checks, and “highly factual” reporting. It’s the work of Krishna Rathuryan, currently a senior at a prep school in Princeton (where he’s also apparently a pretty accomplished distance runner) and team of his friends.
When language fails: “What Is The Ozma Problem, And Why Does It Matter?“
* attributed to playwright Anton Chekhov, who said said “Don’t tell me the moon is shining; show me the glint of light on broken glass.” It has, of course, become a motto for many writers across genre.
###
As we explore explanation, we (especially any readers in or near Manhattan Beach, California) might note that today is one of the two days of the year (symmetrically on either side of the winter solstice, 37 days before and 37 after) when the public sculpture there, “Light Gate,” becomes a portal “unlocked” by the rays of the setting sun… as Atlas Obscura puts it, “a bit of Druidic paganism by way of high modern design.”
#antonChekhov #chekhov #chekov #culture #gottfriedLeibniz #history #immanuelKant #issacNewton #kant #language #lightGate #manhattanBeach #ozma #ozmaProblem #philosophy #science #technology
-
“Show, don’t tell”*…
Some things are very difficult to explain using words alone; they require physical demonstration. Consider, for example, the distinction between right and left. It turns out that this difficulty has been at the heart of the great scientific debates about the nature of space…
… explain right and left to a friend using language alone and without using the words right and left. As you can only use language, you can’t show your hands or use pictures!
It’s tricky, isn’t it? The difference between right and left isn’t as straightforward as it seems. If we dig a little deeper, we will find that the science behind right and left is surprising, complex, and profound.
How can two things be identical yet different at the same time? This was the question that puzzled one of humankind’s greatest thinkers, Immanuel Kant.
Many of the great debates of the Scientific Revolution during the 16th and 17th centuries concerned the nature of space. The English polymath Sir Isaac Newton proposed that space was absolute: space is an entity in itself and exists even without objects, matter, or living beings filling it.
In contrast, Gottfried Leibniz, Newton’s bitter rival, argued that space was relational: it only existed because of the relations between the objects that fill it. If objects do not exist, then space doesn’t either.
Meanwhile, Immanuel Kant used handedness to give his two cents. He asked us to imagine a solitary hand floating in an otherwise completely empty space. The hand must either be a right hand or a left hand, and this will be the case even in a space where no relationships between objects can be observed. Kant noted that our hands are geometrically and mathematically identical in every way possible, whether it be the lengths of the fingers or the angles between them. Yet, the one fundamental difference between them—that one is a right hand, and the other is a left hand—exists in itself; it is intrinsic to the hand and not related to any other object, similar to space itself. Space has an absolute property.
Ultimately, Kant’s theories of handedness were not foolproof and could not be used to prove that space is absolute. Indeed, Kant would switch between the Newtonian and Leibnizian schools of thought during his lifetime. However, Kant did show just how puzzling and difficult it is to explain why right hands and left hands are identical but different. That intrinsic quality of handedness is almost impossible to explain without showing, and this is the root of the Ozma Problem.
In 1960, Project Ozma was launched in West Virginia. Named after the ruler of the fictional Land of Oz, Project Ozma was a huge telescope that listened for signals from space, signals that could be proof of extraterrestrial intelligence. Unfortunately, the project only ran for a few months, and it had no major success.
Let’s say the telescope had picked up these signals. How would we on Earth respond? We would need to convert their signals, after which we would send our own. Telescopes and computers use binary code. And directionality is crucial to understanding binary, as it is read left to right and decoded right to left. So, if we are sending binary signals to aliens, we need to be sure they understand which direction is left and which is right. How can we be sure they share our understanding of directions?
This is the Ozma Problem, a thought experiment first described by Martin Gardner [see the almanac entry here] in his 1964 book, The Ambidextrous Universe. In this book, Gardner pitched a number of solutions.
Before going into Gardner’s work, here’s a seemingly simple solution: lay your palms face down on a table and equally spaced from your body. The thumb that’s closer to your heart? That’s the left side. The right side is defined by the thumb farther away from the heart.
Another potential solution would be to use north and south as reference points: when facing north, everything towards east is the right side, and everything pointing west is the left side.
The problem with these solutions is that they both rely on a shared point of reference, like the direction of north-south-east-west and the location of the heart. In no way can we be certain that an alien species would share these!
Some of the solutions that Gardner proposed in his book use magnetic fields, planetary rotation, and the direction of current flow. And as we discussed before, they all fail because of the need for a shared point of reference.
So, after centuries of wondering whether we are alone in the universe, we finally make contact with an alien species, only to find that our inability to explain something as mundane as right and left precludes meaningful dialogue. The Ozma Problem demonstrates the limits of our language, and it challenges anthropocentrism, which is the notion that human beings and our experiences are the center of the universe.
Many thought problems are hypothetical and can’t be solved, but the Ozma Problem does have a solution. In fact, the solution already existed when Gardner first described it. But it’s not immediately associated with right-left asymmetry or aliens.
While we cannot be sure that aliens share our anatomy or our perception of north-south-east-west, if they inhabit the same universe as us, we can assume the fundamental forces of physics apply to them too.
There are four fundamental forces of physics: gravity, electromagnetism, strong nuclear forces (the force that binds atomic nuclei together), and weak nuclear forces (the force that causes atomic decay).
Up until 1956, it was assumed these fundamental forces all display parity. Parity is an important concept in physics, and it can be demonstrated visually by using a mirror. If we stand in front of a mirror holding an apple in our right hand and then drop it, the reflection will show it falling to the ground, but the apple will fall from your left hand. Gravity still works in the reflection. Likewise, if we look at the strong forces binding atomic nuclei and then observe them in a mirror, the images would be identical, just with right and left switched.
But in 1956, Professor Chien-Shiung Wu, a physicist, conducted a ground breaking experiment. She was able to prove that the weak nuclear force—the decay of atoms—did not always demonstrate parity. The weak nuclear force does not adhere to mirror symmetry.
Professor Wu showed this by observing the decay of cobalt-60 atoms. When atoms decay, they spin out electrons. Up until then, scientists had always observed these electrons spinning out equally in all directions. But Professor Wu saw that cobalt-60 will always preferentially spin out electrons in a certain direction. In other words, the movement is asymmetric. For some reason, the decay of atoms is the one fundamental force that does not adhere to parity or mirror symmetry, thus showing that directionality is intrinsic to the universe, just as Kant had postulated in the 18th century.
For the first time in history, it was proven that nature can prefer one direction. Very soon after Wu’s findings, physicists were able to prove that elementary particles known as neutrinos always spin towards the left.
What does this mean for our communication with aliens? If the aliens can replicate Professor Wu’s experiment and visualize the spin of electrons while cobalt-60 decays, they can orient right and left!
Ironically, Professor Wu was not afforded any sort of parity herself during her working life. Other scientists were recognized for research that could not have been achieved without hers. Today, the weak force remains one of the most important and mysterious topics in physics today, thanks to Professor Wu.
So, if the only way to scientifically and definitively define the difference between right and left is to build a particle accelerator and observe the decay of cobalt-60, clearly the difference is not as straightforward as it may first seem! The Ozma Problem is proof that the most mundane concepts are sometimes directly linked to the cosmos and speak to the nature of existence itself…
An essay by Dr. Maloy Das (see the bio in this unrelated– but also fascinating– article by him). From the remarkable blog, Fascinating World, scored a highly credible source by the MBFC for having proper sourcing, no failed fact-checks, and “highly factual” reporting. It’s the work of Krishna Rathuryan, currently a senior at a prep school in Princeton (where he’s also apparently a pretty accomplished distance runner) and team of his friends.
When language fails: “What Is The Ozma Problem, And Why Does It Matter?“
* attributed to playwright Anton Chekhov, who said said “Don’t tell me the moon is shining; show me the glint of light on broken glass.” It has, of course, become a motto for many writers across genre.
###
As we explore explanation, we (especially any readers in or near Manhattan Beach, California) might note that today is one of the two days of the year (symmetrically on either side of the winter solstice, 37 days before and 37 after) when the public sculpture there, “Light Gate,” becomes a portal “unlocked” by the rays of the setting sun… as Atlas Obscura puts it, “a bit of Druidic paganism by way of high modern design.”
#antonChekhov #chekhov #chekov #culture #gottfriedLeibniz #history #immanuelKant #issacNewton #kant #language #lightGate #manhattanBeach #ozma #ozmaProblem #philosophy #science #technology
-
**Kant on language, culture and politics**
"_Indeed, he seems not to have anticipated the role that the concept of language was to play in twentieth century Anglo-American analytical philosophy, nor does he foresee the sometimes-devastating role that linguistic and ethnic national divisions were to play in nineteenth and twentieth century European politics._"
🔗 https://www.cambridge.org/core/blog/2025/10/16/kant-on-language-culture-and-politics/.
-
Zum Vortrag über #Kant im #Schopenhauer-Studio der #Universitätsbibliothek #Frankfurt.
Das soll Schopenhauers Sofa sein und er soll auch darauf verstorben sein!
Mehr Kult geht kaum.
#immanuelkant #ub #naturgeschichte #PhysikalischerVerein -
Zum Vortrag über #Kant im #Schopenhauer-Studio der #Universitätsbibliothek #Frankfurt.
Das soll Schopenhauers Sofa sein und er soll auch darauf verstorben sein!
Mehr Kult geht kaum.
#immanuelkant #ub #naturgeschichte #PhysikalischerVerein -
Zum Vortrag über #Kant im #Schopenhauer-Studio der #Universitätsbibliothek #Frankfurt.
Das soll Schopenhauers Sofa sein und er soll auch darauf verstorben sein!
Mehr Kult geht kaum.
#immanuelkant #ub #naturgeschichte #PhysikalischerVerein -
Zum Vortrag über #Kant im #Schopenhauer-Studio der #Universitätsbibliothek #Frankfurt.
Das soll Schopenhauers Sofa sein und er soll auch darauf verstorben sein!
Mehr Kult geht kaum.
#immanuelkant #ub #naturgeschichte #PhysikalischerVerein -
Zum Vortrag über #Kant im #Schopenhauer-Studio der #Universitätsbibliothek #Frankfurt.
Das soll Schopenhauers Sofa sein und er soll auch darauf verstorben sein!
Mehr Kult geht kaum.
#immanuelkant #ub #naturgeschichte #PhysikalischerVerein -
Habe #Mut, dich deines eigenen Verstandes zu bedienen!
(Immanuel #Kant)
#psychotHHerapie #Zitat #Zitate #Verstand #ImmanuelKant -
Gilles Lipovetsky: “Si quiere vivir mejor, enamórese, tome Prozac, no busque en la filosofía”
-
Concepts without intuition are empty, intuitions without concepts are blind.
-- Immanuel Kant -
-
-
-
-
-
Der Aufstieg von Parteien, wie seinerzeit bei der NSDAP., aber auch der Abstieg von Parteien, ist kausal verknüpft mit Wahlen, Primär auf Parteien zu schauen halte ich für kurzsichtig. Wie dem auch sei, wenn ich an die vielen denke, die all die rechten und rechtsextremen Parteien wählen, ob nun hierzulande oder andernorts, fällt mit immer mal wieder Immanuel Kant ein:
"Aufklärung ist der Ausgang des Menschen aus seiner selbst verschuldeten Unmündigkeit.
Unmündigkeit ist das Unvermögen, sich seines Verstandes ohne Leitung eines anderen zu bedienen.
Selbstverschuldet ist diese Unmündigkeit, wenn die Ursache derselben nicht am Mangel des Verstandes, sondern der Entschließung und des Mutes liegt, sich seiner ohne Leitung eines anderen zu bedienen. (...)
Faulheit und Feigheit sind die Ursachen, warum ein so großer Teil der Menschen, (...) dennoch gerne zeitlebens unmündig bleiben; und warum es Anderen so leicht wird, sich zu deren Vormündern aufzuwerfen."
(Quelle: https://www.projekt-gutenberg.org/kant/aufklae/aufkl001.html )
#faulheit #rechts #rechtsextrem #afd #cdu #csu #spd #kant #aufklarung #sapereaude #Unmündigkeit #unmundigkeit
#Partei #wahlen #wahler #wähler #wählerinnen #immanuelkant -
Should We Teach Our Children To Lie Better?
I remember my grandfather saying “Politicians always lie. That’s why they get elected. It’s a dirty business. Stay away from it.” Keep in mind, he was a good acquaintance if not a good friend with all the local elected politicians. It was always weird seeing him be friendly with them at church or other social gatherings. So, from my perspective there was always a disconnect that’s been a part of my view of politics and politicians for most of my life. I doubt I’m alone.
Of course politicians aren’t the only ones who lie. Corporations do. Ordinary humans lie to other humans. Hell, these days, even AI chatbots lie. It’s all an expected part of the game of life, regardless of what the ninth of the Ten Commandments say.
Most legal systems are built on the premise that one side of the other is going to lie in some form or the other and it’s up to a judge or jury to determine where the truth my lie. But rarely does the losing side get punished for using lies as a defense.
What I do wonder though is why we waste so much time teaching our children not to lie. Given that we know full well they are going to grow up in a world where lying is not just the coin of the realm, but the realm itself, why bother? We do spend time teaching them to beware of the lies being told by salespeople, politicians, friends, etc… But I don’t think many parents spend time providing their progeny with better deceptive skills to be successful.
It’s a weird disconnect. Of course we want our kids to own up when they do something wrong. But eventually they figure it out anyway and everyone goes around living the lie about not lying. Rinse. Repeat.
Bad liars are easy to spot. So I guess arming youngsters with better skills wouldn’t’ necessarily be a bad thing. These days, even the bad liars seem to be rewarded for getting away with it, so a better skill set might unlock better achievements. But then again, choosing sides between Kant and Aristotle on the virtues of truth telling and situational ethics isn’t really good fodder for a dinner time conversation with the kids.
There are many old sayings that end with “_________makes liars of us all.” You can fill in the blank with “the world,” “fear,” “marriage,” “The Internet,” etc…. You can pick your target for blame. Just don’t pick yourself.
Perhaps hallucinating AI chatbots will one day level the playing field of liars by “reasoning” this down to the lowest common denominator. Regardless of what their makers say, they can only learn and spit back what humans have already learned and regurgitated back into the world. We’re all lousy liars, some lousier than others. We lie to the tune of our own rhyme or reason in the moment. And we certainly haven’t learned to pretend other as we endlessly recycle our inability to do different.
Image from Jametlene Reskp on Unsplash.
You can find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. I can also be found on social media under my name as above.
#Aristotle #Culture #donaldTrump #ethics #ImmanuelKant #lies #lying #news #Politics #Trump
-
So amazing and powerful!
Spontaneously, I had to think of what Immanuel Kant, who was considered so rational, had written.
"Two things fill the mind with ever new and increasing admiration and awe, the more often and the more persistently I think about them: the starry sky above me and the moral law within me." I connect both with the awareness of my existence. "The first begins from the place I occupy in the outer world of the senses, and extends the connection in which I stand into the immeasurably great with worlds above worlds and systems of systems, and furthermore into boundless times of their periodic movement, their beginning and continuation. The second begins with my invisible self, my personality, and presents me in a world that has true infinity, but is perceptible only to the mind, and with which (but thereby also simultaneously with all those visible worlds) I recognize myself not as there in a merely accidental, but in a general and necessary connection. The former sight of an innumerable multitude of worlds destroys, as it were, my importance as an animal creature, which must return the matter from which it was made to the planet (a mere point in space) after it has been endowed with vitality for a short time (one does not know how). The second, on the other hand, raises my value as an intelligence infinitely through my personality, in which the moral law gives me a life independent of animality and even of the whole world of the senses.
#kant #ImmanuelKant #star #sky #moral #ACAB #acab1312 #allcops
-
‘Het is onwaarschijnlijk dat Kant ooit bij prostituees is geweest’:
#CarolinevanderPlas #DaniëlRobberechts #DonaldTrump #GeertWilders #GerhildvanRooij #ImmanuelKant #PausFranciscus #VladimirPoetin
https://tonvanthof.com/2025/04/21/verloedering-van-de-vooruitgang/ -
‘Het is onwaarschijnlijk dat Kant ooit bij prostituees is geweest’:
#CarolinevanderPlas #DaniëlRobberechts #DonaldTrump #GeertWilders #GerhildvanRooij #ImmanuelKant #PausFranciscus #VladimirPoetin
https://tonvanthof.com/2025/04/21/verloedering-van-de-vooruitgang/ -
‘Het is onwaarschijnlijk dat Kant ooit bij prostituees is geweest’:
#CarolinevanderPlas #DaniëlRobberechts #DonaldTrump #GeertWilders #GerhildvanRooij #ImmanuelKant #PausFranciscus #VladimirPoetin
https://tonvanthof.com/2025/04/21/verloedering-van-de-vooruitgang/ -
‘Het is onwaarschijnlijk dat Kant ooit bij prostituees is geweest’:
#CarolinevanderPlas #DaniëlRobberechts #DonaldTrump #GeertWilders #GerhildvanRooij #ImmanuelKant #PausFranciscus #VladimirPoetin
https://tonvanthof.com/2025/04/21/verloedering-van-de-vooruitgang/ -
Ich könnte 🤢....
Aus einem Interview mit #HelmutSchmidt (Quelle: Bundeskanzler Helmut Schmidt Stiftung):
...Vertritt er (Schmidt)....die Auffassung, wer ohne philosophische Grundlage handele, laufe Gefahr, ein "Opportunist" u "Scharlatan" zu werden.
Schmidt benennt 4 philos. Lehrmeister: #MarcAurel #MaxWeber #ImmanuelKant #KarlPopperWelche könnte wohl #Spahn benennen 🤔? Trump, Musk, Merz u natürlich Spahn?
Politiker wie Schmidt fehlen schmerzlich.
-
när man gör en synundersökning och beställer två par glasögon för mindre pengar än man trodde, får man beställa supernördig facklitteratur i present åt sig själv.
det här är så sjukt jävla assexigt, så ni fattar inte. det är hjärnorgasm efter hjärnorgasm, bara tanken på det. detta är det närmaste jag kommer till att ha en fetisch.
#fototeori #johnberger #filosofi #immanuelkant #michelfoucault #detsublima #vansinnet
-
när man gör en synundersökning och beställer två par glasögon för mindre pengar än man trodde, får man beställa supernördig facklitteratur i present åt sig själv.
det här är så sjukt jävla assexigt, så ni fattar inte. det är hjärnorgasm efter hjärnorgasm, bara tanken på det. detta är det närmaste jag kommer till att ha en fetisch.
#fototeori #johnberger #filosofi #immanuelkant #michelfoucault #detsublima #vansinnet
