Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'The Fixation of Belief', 'Why the Universe Exists' and 'Truth, Correspondence, Explanation and Knowledge'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these texts


58 ideas

1. Philosophy / E. Nature of Metaphysics / 3. Metaphysical Systems
Metaphysics does not rest on facts, but on what we are inclined to believe [Peirce]
     Full Idea: Metaphysical systems have not usually rested upon any observed facts, or not in any great degree. They are chiefly adopted because their fundamental propositions seem 'agreeable to reason', which means that which we find ourselves inclined to believe.
     From: Charles Sanders Peirce (The Fixation of Belief [1877], p.15)
     A reaction: This leads to Peirce's key claim - that we should allow our beliefs to be formed by something outside of ourselves. I don't share Peirce's contempt for metaphysics, which I take to be about the most abstract presuppositions of our ordinary beliefs.
2. Reason / A. Nature of Reason / 4. Aims of Reason
Reason aims to discover the unknown by thinking about the known [Peirce]
     Full Idea: The object of reasoning is to find out, from the consideration of what we already know, something else which we do not know.
     From: Charles Sanders Peirce (The Fixation of Belief [1877], p. 7)
     A reaction: I defy anyone to come up with a better definition of reasoning than that. The emphasis is on knowledge rather than truth, which you would expect from a pragmatist. …Actually the definition doesn't cover conditional reasoning terribly well.
3. Truth / B. Truthmakers / 1. For Truthmakers
We want to know what makes sentences true, rather than defining 'true' [McFetridge]
     Full Idea: The generalisation 'What makes a (any) sentence true?' is not a request for definitions of 'true' (the concept), but rather requests for (partial) explanations of why certain particular sentences are true.
     From: Ian McFetridge (Truth, Correspondence, Explanation and Knowledge [1977], II)
     A reaction: McFetridge is responding to the shortcomings of Tarski's account of truth. The mystery seems to be why some of our representations of the world are 'successful', and others are not.
7. Existence / D. Theories of Reality / 2. Realism
Realism is basic to the scientific method [Peirce]
     Full Idea: The fundamental hypothesis of the method of science is this: There are real things, whose characters are entirely independent of our opinion of them.
     From: Charles Sanders Peirce (The Fixation of Belief [1877]), quoted by Albert Atkin - Peirce 3 'method'
     A reaction: He admits later that this is only a commitment and not a fact. It seems to me that when you combine this idea with the huge success of science, the denial of realism is crazy. Philosophy has a lot to answer for.
7. Existence / D. Theories of Reality / 4. Anti-realism
If someone doubted reality, they would not actually feel dissatisfaction [Peirce]
     Full Idea: Nobody can really doubt that there are Reals, for, if he did, doubt would not be a source of dissatisfaction.
     From: Charles Sanders Peirce (The Fixation of Belief [1877], p.19)
     A reaction: This rests on Peirce's view that all that really matters is a sense of genuine dissatisfaction, rather than a theoretical idea. So even at the end of Meditation One, Descartes isn't actually worried about whether his furniture exists.
7. Existence / D. Theories of Reality / 8. Facts / a. Facts
We normally explain natural events by citing further facts [McFetridge]
     Full Idea: If one were asked 'What makes salt soluble in water?', the most natural answer would be something of the style 'The fact that it has such-and-such structure'.
     From: Ian McFetridge (Truth, Correspondence, Explanation and Knowledge [1977], II)
     A reaction: Personally I would want to talk about its 'powers' (dispositional properties), rather than its 'structure' (categorical properties). This defends facts, but you could easily paraphrase 'fact' out of this reply (as McFetridge realised).
11. Knowledge Aims / A. Knowledge / 4. Belief / c. Aim of beliefs
The feeling of belief shows a habit which will determine our actions [Peirce]
     Full Idea: The feeling of believing is a more or less sure indication of there being established in our nature some habit which will determine our actions. Doubt never has such an effect.
     From: Charles Sanders Peirce (The Fixation of Belief [1877], p.10)
     A reaction: It is one thing to assert this fairly accurate observation, and another to assert that this is the essence or definition of a belief. Perhaps it is the purpose of belief, without being the phenomenological essence of it. We act in states of uncertainty.
We are entirely satisfied with a firm belief, even if it is false [Peirce]
     Full Idea: As soon as a firm belief is reached we are entirely satisfied, whether the belief be true or false.
     From: Charles Sanders Peirce (The Fixation of Belief [1877], p.10)
     A reaction: This does not deny that the truth or falsehood of a belief is independent of whether we are satisfied with it. It is making a fair point, though, about why we believe things, and it can't be because of truth, because we don't know how to ensure that.
We want true beliefs, but obviously we think our beliefs are true [Peirce]
     Full Idea: We seek for a belief that we shall think to be true; but we think each one of our beliefs to be true, and, indeed, it is mere tautology to say so.
     From: Charles Sanders Peirce (The Fixation of Belief [1877], p.11)
     A reaction: If, as I do, you like to define belief as 'commitment to truth', Peirce makes a rather startling observation. You are rendered unable to ask whether your beliefs are true, because you have defined them as true. Nice point…
A mere question does not stimulate a struggle for belief; there must be a real doubt [Peirce]
     Full Idea: The mere putting of a proposition into the interrogative form does not stimulate the mind to any struggle after belief; there must be a real and living doubt.
     From: Charles Sanders Peirce (The Fixation of Belief [1877], p.11)
     A reaction: This the attractive aspect of Peirce's pragmatism, that he is always focusing on real life rather than abstract theory or pure logic.
13. Knowledge Criteria / B. Internal Justification / 2. Pragmatic justification
We need our beliefs to be determined by some external inhuman permanency [Peirce]
     Full Idea: It is necessary that a method should be found by which our beliefs be determined by nothing human, but by some external permanency - by something upon which our thinking has no effect.
     From: Charles Sanders Peirce (The Fixation of Belief [1877]), quoted by Robert Fogelin - Walking the Tightrope of Reason Ch.5
     A reaction: This very sensible and interesting remark hovers somewhere between empiricism and pragmatism. Fogelin very persuasively builds his account of knowledge on it. The key point is that we hardly ever choose what to believe. See Idea 2454.
13. Knowledge Criteria / B. Internal Justification / 4. Foundationalism / b. Basic beliefs
Demonstration does not rest on first principles of reason or sensation, but on freedom from actual doubt [Peirce]
     Full Idea: It is a common idea that demonstration must rest on indubitable propositions, either first principles of a general nature, or first sensations; but actual demonstration is completely satisfactory if it starts from propositions free from all actual doubt.
     From: Charles Sanders Peirce (The Fixation of Belief [1877], p.11)
     A reaction: Another nice example of Peirce focusing on the practical business of thinking, rather than abstract theory. I agree with this approach, that explanation and proof do not aim at perfection and indubitability, but at what satisfies a critical mind.
13. Knowledge Criteria / C. External Justification / 1. External Justification
Doubts should be satisfied by some external permanency upon which thinking has no effect [Peirce]
     Full Idea: To satisfy our doubts it is necessary that a method should be found by which our beliefs may be determined by nothing human, but by some external permanency - by something upon which our thinking has no effect.
     From: Charles Sanders Peirce (The Fixation of Belief [1877], p.18)
     A reaction: This may be the single most important idea in pragmatism and in the philosophy of science. See Fodor on experiments (Idea 2455). Put the question to nature. The essential aim is to be passive in our beliefs - just let reality form them.
13. Knowledge Criteria / D. Scepticism / 6. Scepticism Critique
Once doubt ceases, there is no point in continuing to argue [Peirce]
     Full Idea: Some people seem to love to argue a point after all the world is fully convinced of it. But no further advance can be made. When doubt ceases, mental action on the subject comes to an end; and, if it did go on, it would be without purpose.
     From: Charles Sanders Peirce (The Fixation of Belief [1877], p.11)
     A reaction: This is the way Peirce's pragmatism, which deals with how real thinking actually works (rather than abstract logic), deals with scepticism. However, there is a borderline where almost everyone is satisfied, but the very wise person remains sceptical.
26. Natural Theory / B. Natural Kinds / 2. Defining Kinds
What is true of one piece of copper is true of another (unlike brass) [Peirce]
     Full Idea: The guiding principle is that what is true of one piece of copper is true of another; such a guiding principle with regard to copper would be much safer than with regard to many other substances - brass, for example.
     From: Charles Sanders Peirce (The Fixation of Belief [1877], p. 8)
     A reaction: Peirce is so beautifully simple and sensible. This gives the essential notion of a natural kind, and is a key notion in our whole understanding of physical reality.
27. Natural Reality / A. Classical Physics / 1. Mechanics / d. Gravity
Gravity is unusual, in that it always attracts and never repels [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: Gravity is an odd sort of force, not least because it only ever works one way. Electromagnetism attracts and repels, but with gravity there are only positive masses always attract.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 05)
     A reaction: This leads to speculation about anti-gravity, but there is no current evidence for it.
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 1. Relativity / b. General relativity
In the Big Bang general relativity fails, because gravity is too powerful [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: At the origin of the universe gravity becomes so powerful that general relativity breaks down, giving infinity for every answer.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 09)
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 2. Electrodynamics / a. Electrodynamics
Quantum electrodynamics incorporates special relativity and quantum mechanics [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: The theory of electromagnetism that incorporates both special relativity and quantum mechanics is quantum electrodynamics (QED). It was developed by Dirac and others, and perfected in the 1940s. The field is a collection of quanta.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 02)
     A reaction: This builds on Maxwell's earlier classical theory. QED is said to be the best theory in all of physics.
Photons have zero rest mass, so virtual photons have infinite range [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: Photons, the field quanta of the electromagnetic force, have zero rest mass, so virtual photons can exist indefinitely and travel any distance, meaning the electromagnetic force has an infinite range.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 02)
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 2. Electrodynamics / b. Fields
In the standard model all the fundamental force fields merge at extremely high energies [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: The standard model says that the fields of all fundamental forces should merge at extremely high energies, meaning there is also a unified, high-energy field out there.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 03)
     A reaction: Not quite sure what 'out there' means. This idea is linked to the quest for dark energy. Is this unified phenomenon only found near the Big Bang?
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 2. Electrodynamics / c. Electrons
Electrons move fast, so are subject to special relativity [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: Electrons in atoms move at high speeds, so they are subject to the special theory of relativity.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 02)
     A reaction: Presumably this implies a frame of reference, and defining velocities relative to other electrons. Plus time-dilation?
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 3. Chromodynamics / a. Chromodynamics
The strong force is repulsive at short distances, strong at medium, and fades at long [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: Experiments show that the nuclear binding force does not follow the inverse square law, but is repulsive at the shortest distances, then attractive, then fades away rapidly as distance increases further.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 02)
     A reaction: So how does it know when to be strong? Magnetism doesn't vary according to distance, and light obeys the inverse square law, because everything is decided at the output. - See 21151 for an explanation. It interacts after departure.
Gluons, the particles carrying the strong force, interact because of their colour charge [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: In QCD the particles that carry the strong force are called gluons. ...Gluons carry their own colour charges, so they can interact with each other (unlike photons) via the strong nuclear force (which limits the range of the force).
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 02)
     A reaction: So the force varies in strength with distance because the degree of separation among the spreading gluons varies? The force has one range, which is squashed when close, effective at medium, and loses touch with distance?
The strong force binds quarks tight, and the nucleus more weakly [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: The strong force holds quarks together within protons and neutrons, and residual effects of the strong force bind protons (whch repel one another) and neutrons together in nuclei.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 02)
     A reaction: So the force is much stronger between quarks (which can't escape), and only 'residual' in the nucleus, which must be why smashing nuclei open is fairly easy, but smashin protons open needs higher energies.
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 3. Chromodynamics / b. Quarks
Classifying hadrons revealed two symmetry patterns, produced by three basic elements [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: Classifying hadrons according to charge, strangeness and spin revealed patterns of eight and ten particles (SU(3) symmetery). The mathematics then showed that these are built from a basic group of only three members.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 01)
Quarks in threes can build hadrons with spin ½ or with spin 3/2 [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: Quarks in threes can build hadrons with spin ½ (proton, duu; neutron, ddu; lambda, dus), or with spin 3/2 (omega-minus, sss).
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 01)
Three different colours of quark (as in the proton) can cancel out to give no colour [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: Just as mixing three colours of light gives white, so the three colour charges of quarks can add up to give no colour. This is what happens in the proton, which always contains one blue-charge quark, one red and one green.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 02)
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 4. Standard Model / b. Standard model
The four fundamental forces (gravity, electromagnetism, weak and strong) are the effects of particles [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: There are four fundamental forces: gravity, electromagnetism, and the weak and strong nuclear forces. Particle physics has so far failed to encompass the force of gravity. The forces that shape our world are themselves the effect of particles.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 02)
     A reaction: Philosophers must take note of the fact that forces are the effects of particles. Common sense pictures forces imposed on particles, like throwing a tennis ball, but the particles are actually the sources of force. The gravitino is speculative.
The weak force explains beta decay, and the change of type by quarks and leptons [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: The beta decay of the neutron (into a proton, an electron and an antineutrino) can be described in terms of the weak force, which is 10,000 times weaker than the strong force. It allows the quarks and leptons to change from one type to another.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 02)
     A reaction: This seems to make it the key source of radioactivity. Perhaps it should be called the Force of Change?
Three particles enable the weak force: W+ and W- are charged, and Z° is not [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: The quantum field theory of the weak force needs three carrier particles. The W+ and W- are electrically charged, and enable the weak force to change the charge of a particle. The Z° is uncharged, and mediates weak interactions with no charge change.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 02)
The weak force particles are heavy, so the force has a short range [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: The W and Z particles are heavy, and so cannot travel far from their parents. The weak force therefore has a very short range.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 02)
Why do the charges of the very different proton and electron perfectly match up? [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: Why do the proton and electron charges mirror each other so perfectly when they are such different particles?
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 04)
     A reaction: We seem to have reached a common stage in science, where we have a wonderful descriptive model (the Standard Model), but we cannot explain why what is modelled is the way it is.
The Standard Model cannot explain dark energy, survival of matter, gravity, or force strength [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: The standard model cannot explain dark matter, or dark energy (which is causing expansion to accelerate). It cannot explain how matter survived annihilation with anti-matter in the Big Bang, or explain gravity. The strength of each force is unexplained.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 06)
     A reaction: [compressed] P.141 adds that the model has to be manipulated to keep the Higgs mass low enough.
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 4. Standard Model / c. Particle properties
Spin is a built-in ration of angular momentum [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: Spin is a built-in ration of angular momentum.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 01)
     A reaction: As an outsider all I can do is collect descriptions of such properties from the experts. The experts appear to be happy with the numbers inserted in the equations.
Quarks have red, green or blue colour charge (akin to electric charge) [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: Quarks have a property akin to electric charge, called their colour charge. It comes in three varieties, red, green and blue.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 02)
Fermions, with spin ½, are antisocial, and cannot share quantum states [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: Particles with half-integer spin, such as electrons, protons or quarks (all spin ½) have an asymmetry in their wavefunction that makes them antisocial. These particles (Fermions) cannot share a quantum state.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 02)
     A reaction: This is said to explain the complexity of matter, with carbon an especially good example.
Spin is akin to rotation, and is easily measured in a magnetic field [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: Spin is a quantum-mechanical property of a particle akin to rotation about its own axis. Particles of different spins respond to magnetic fields in different ways, so it is a relatively easy thing to measure.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 04)
     A reaction: I wish I knew what 'akin to' meant. Maybe particles are not rigid bodies, so they cannot spin in the way a top can? It must be an electro-magnetic property. Idea 21166 says spin has two possible directions.
Particles are spread out, with wave-like properties, and higher energy shortens the wavelength [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: Particles obeying the laws of quantum mechanics have wave-like properties - moving as a quantum wave-function, spread out in space, with wavelengths that get shorter as their energy increases.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 02)
     A reaction: Thus X-rays are dangerous, but long wave radio is not. De Broglie's equation.
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 4. Standard Model / d. Mass
The mass of protons and neutrinos is mostly binding energy, not the quarks [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: Most of a proton's or neutrino's mass is contained in the interaction energies of a 'sea' of quarks, antiquarks and gluons that bind them. ...You might feel solid, but in fact you're 99 per cent binding energy.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 04)
     A reaction: This is because energy is equivalent to mass (although gluons are said to have energy but no mass - puzzled by that). This is a fact which needs a bit of time to digest. Once you've grasped we are full of space, you still have understood it.
Gravitional mass turns out to be the same as inertial mass [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: There are two types of mass: gravitational mass quantifies how strongly an object feels gravity, while inertial mass quantifies an object's resistance to acceleration. There proven equality is at the heart of General Relativity.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 05)
     A reaction: It had never occurred to me that these two values might come apart. Doesn't their identical values demonstrate that they are in fact the same thing? Sounds like Hesperus/Phosphorus to me. The book calls it 'mysterious'.
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 4. Standard Model / e. Protons
Neutrons are slightly heavier than protons, and decay into them by emitting an electron [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: The proton (938.3 MeV) is lighter than the neutron (939.6 MeV) and does not decay, but the heavier neutron can change into a proton by emitting an electron. (If you gather a bucketful of neutrons, after ten minutes only half of them would be left).
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 01)
     A reaction: Protons are more or less eternal, but some theories have them decaying after billions of years. Smashing protons together is a popular pastime for physicists.
Top, bottom, charm and strange quarks quickly decay into up and down [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: Quarks can change from one variety to another, and the top, bottom, charm and strange quarks all rapidly decay to the up and down quarks of everyday life.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 01)
     A reaction: Hence the universe is largely composed of up and down quarks and electrons. The other quarks seem to be more important in the early universe.
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 4. Standard Model / f. Neutrinos
Neutrinos were proposed as the missing energy in neutron beta decay [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: When a neutron decays into a proton and an electron (one example of beta decay), the energy of the two particles adds up to less than the starting energy of the neutron. Pauli and Fermi concluded that a neutrino (an electron antineutrino) is emitted.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 01)
     A reaction: I'm wondering how much they could infer about the nature of the new particle (which was only confirmed 26 years later).
Only neutrinos spin anticlockwise [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: Neutrinos are the only particles that seem just to spin anticlockwise.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 06)
     A reaction: See 21166. Anti-neutrino spin is the opposite way. Which way up do you hold the neutrino when pronouncing that it is 'anticlockwise?
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 4. Standard Model / g. Anti-matter
Standard antineutrinos have opposite spin and opposite lepton number [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: In the conventional standard model neutrinos have antiparticles - which spin in the opposite direction, and have the opposite lepton number.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 05)
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 5. Unified Models / a. Electro-weak unity
The symmetry of unified electromagnetic and weak forces was broken by the Higgs field [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: In the very early hot universe the electromagnetic and weak nuclear forces were one. The early emergence of the Higgs field led to electroweak symmetry breaking. The W and Z bosons grew fat, and the photon raced away mass-free.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 07)
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 5. Unified Models / b. String theory
Supersymmetric string theory can be expressed using loop quantum gravity [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: String theory, together with its supersymmetric particles, has recently been rewritten in the space-time described by loop quantum gravity (which says that space-time ust be made from finite chunks).
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 09)
String theory is now part of 11-dimensional M-Theory, involving p-branes [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: String theory has now been incorporated into Ed Witten's M-Theory, which is a mathematical framework that lives in 11-dimensional space-time, involving higher-dimensional objects called p-branes, of which strings are a special case.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 09)
String theory might be tested by colliding strings to make bigger 'stringballs' [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: A future accelerator might create 'stringballs', when two strings slam into one another and, rather than combining to form a stretched string, make a tangled ball. Finding them would prove string theory.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 08)
     A reaction: This is the only possible test for string theory which I have seen suggested. How do you 'slam strings together'?
String theory offers a quantum theory of gravity, by describing the graviton [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: String theory works as a quantum theory of gravity because string vibrations can describe gravitons, the hypothetical carriers of the gravitational force.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 09)
     A reaction: Presumably the main aim of a quantum theory of gravity is to include gravitons within particle theory. This idea has to be a main attraction of string theory. Compare Idea 21166.
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 5. Unified Models / c. Supersymmetry
Only supersymmetry offers to incorporate gravity into the scheme [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: Peter Higgs says he is a fan of supersymmetry, largely because it seems to be the only route by which gravity can be brought into the scheme.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 03)
     A reaction: Peter Higgs proposed the Higgs boson (now discovered). This seems a very good reason to favour supersymmetry. A grand unified theory that left out gravity doesn't seem to be unified quite grandly enough.
Supersymmetry says particles and superpartners were unities, but then split [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: The key to supersymmetry is that in the high-energy soup of the early universe, particles and their superpartners were indistinguishable. Each pair existed as single massless entities. With expansion and cooling this supersymmetry broke down.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 08)
Supersymmetry has extra heavy bosons and heavy fermions [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: Supersymmetry posits heavy boson partners for all fermions, and heavy fermions for all bosons.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 02)
     A reaction: The main Fermions are electron, proton and quark. Do extra bosons imply extra forces? Peter Higgs favours supersymmetry.
The evidence for supersymmetry keeps failing to appear [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: The old front-runner theory, supersymmetry, has fallen from grace as the Large Hadron Collider keeps failing to find it.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 07)
27. Natural Reality / C. Space / 4. Substantival Space
The Higgs field means even low energy space is not empty [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: The point about the Higgs field is that even the lowest-energy state of space is not empty.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 02)
     A reaction: So where is the Higgs field located? Even if there is no utterly empty space, the concept of location implies a concept of space more basic than the fields (about 16, I gather) which occupy it. You can't describe movement without a concept of location.
27. Natural Reality / E. Cosmology / 8. Dark Matter
Dark matter must have mass, to produce gravity, and no electric charge, to not reflect light [New Sci.]
     Full Idea: Whatever dark matter is made of, it must have mass to feel and generate gravity; but no electric charge, so it does not interact with light. The leading candidate has been the weakly interacting massive particle (WIMP), much heavier than a proton.
     From: New Scientist writers (Why the Universe Exists [2017], 08)
     A reaction: Note that it must 'generate' gravity. The idea of a law of gravity which is externally imposed on matter is long dead. Heavy WIMPs have not yet been detected.
27. Natural Reality / G. Biology / 3. Evolution
Natural selection might well fill an animal's mind with pleasing thoughts rather than true ones [Peirce]
     Full Idea: It is probably of more advantage to an animal to have his mind filled with pleasing and encouraging visions, independently of their truth; and thus, upon unpractical subjects, natural selection might occasion a fallacious tendency of thought.
     From: Charles Sanders Peirce (The Fixation of Belief [1877], p. 8)
     A reaction: Note that this is a pragmatist saying that a set of beliefs might work fine but be untrue. So Peirce does not have the highly relativistic notion of truth of some later pragmatists. Good for him. Note the early date to be thinking about Darwin.
28. God / B. Proving God / 2. Proofs of Reason / d. Pascal's Wager
If death is annihilation, belief in heaven is a cheap pleasure with no disappointment [Peirce]
     Full Idea: If death is annihilation, then the man who believes that he will certainly go straight to heaven when he dies, provided he have fulfilled certain simple observances in this life, has a cheap pleasure which will not be followed by the least disappointment.
     From: Charles Sanders Peirce (The Fixation of Belief [1877], p.12)
     A reaction: This is a nicely wicked summary of one side of Pascal's options. All the problems of the argument are built into Peirce's word "cheap". Peirce goes on to talk about ostriches burying their heads.