Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'Axiomatic Theories of Truth (2005 ver)', 'Theories of Everything' and '23: First Epistle of John'

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


30 ideas

3. Truth / A. Truth Problems / 2. Defining Truth
Truth definitions don't produce a good theory, because they go beyond your current language [Halbach]
     Full Idea: It is far from clear that a definition of truth can lead to a philosophically satisfactory theory of truth. Tarski's theorem on the undefinability of the truth predicate needs resources beyond those of the language for which it is being defined.
     From: Volker Halbach (Axiomatic Theories of Truth (2005 ver) [2005], 1)
     A reaction: The idea is that you need a 'metalanguage' for the definition. If I say 'p' is a true sentence in language 'L', I am not making that observation from within language L. The dream is a theory confined to the object language.
3. Truth / F. Semantic Truth / 1. Tarski's Truth / c. Meta-language for truth
In semantic theories of truth, the predicate is in an object-language, and the definition in a metalanguage [Halbach]
     Full Idea: In semantic theories of truth (Tarski or Kripke), a truth predicate is defined for an object-language. This definition is carried out in a metalanguage, which is typically taken to include set theory or another strong theory or expressive language.
     From: Volker Halbach (Axiomatic Theories of Truth (2005 ver) [2005], 1)
     A reaction: Presumably the metalanguage includes set theory because that connects it with mathematics, and enables it to be formally rigorous. Tarski showed, in his undefinability theorem, that the meta-language must have increased resources.
3. Truth / G. Axiomatic Truth / 1. Axiomatic Truth
Should axiomatic truth be 'conservative' - not proving anything apart from implications of the axioms? [Halbach]
     Full Idea: If truth is not explanatory, truth axioms should not allow proof of new theorems not involving the truth predicate. It is hence said that axiomatic truth should be 'conservative' - not implying further sentences beyond what the axioms can prove.
     From: Volker Halbach (Axiomatic Theories of Truth (2005 ver) [2005], 1.3)
     A reaction: [compressed]
If truth is defined it can be eliminated, whereas axiomatic truth has various commitments [Halbach]
     Full Idea: If truth can be explicitly defined, it can be eliminated, whereas an axiomatized notion of truth may bring all kinds of commitments.
     From: Volker Halbach (Axiomatic Theories of Truth (2005 ver) [2005], 1.3)
     A reaction: The general principle that anything which can be defined can be eliminated (in an abstract theory, presumably, not in nature!) raises interesting questions about how many true theories there are which are all equivalent to one another.
Axiomatic theories of truth need a weak logical framework, and not a strong metatheory [Halbach]
     Full Idea: Axiomatic theories of truth can be presented within very weak logical frameworks which require very few resources, and avoid the need for a strong metalanguage and metatheory.
     From: Volker Halbach (Axiomatic Theories of Truth (2005 ver) [2005], 1)
Instead of a truth definition, add a primitive truth predicate, and axioms for how it works [Halbach]
     Full Idea: The axiomatic approach does not presuppose that truth can be defined. Instead, a formal language is expanded by a new primitive predicate of truth, and axioms for that predicate are then laid down.
     From: Volker Halbach (Axiomatic Theories of Truth (2005 ver) [2005], 1)
     A reaction: Idea 15647 explains why Halbach thinks the definition route is no good.
3. Truth / H. Deflationary Truth / 2. Deflationary Truth
Deflationists say truth merely serves to express infinite conjunctions [Halbach]
     Full Idea: According to many deflationists, truth serves merely the purpose of expressing infinite conjunctions.
     From: Volker Halbach (Axiomatic Theories of Truth (2005 ver) [2005], 1.3)
     A reaction: That is, it asserts sentences that are too numerous to express individually. It also seems, on a deflationist view, to serve for anaphoric reference to sentences, such as 'what she just said is true'.
4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 1. Set Theory
To prove the consistency of set theory, we must go beyond set theory [Halbach]
     Full Idea: The consistency of set theory cannot be established without assumptions transcending set theory.
     From: Volker Halbach (Axiomatic Theories of Truth (2005 ver) [2005], 2.1)
5. Theory of Logic / C. Ontology of Logic / 1. Ontology of Logic
We can use truth instead of ontologically loaded second-order comprehension assumptions about properties [Halbach]
     Full Idea: The reduction of 2nd-order theories (of properties or sets) to axiomatic theories of truth may be conceived as a form of reductive nominalism, replacing existence assumptions (for comprehension axioms) by ontologically innocent truth assumptions.
     From: Volker Halbach (Axiomatic Theories of Truth (2005 ver) [2005], 1.1)
     A reaction: I like this very much, as weeding properties out of logic (without weeding them out of the world). So-called properties in logic are too abundant, so there is a misfit with their role in science.
5. Theory of Logic / E. Structures of Logic / 7. Predicates in Logic
Instead of saying x has a property, we can say a formula is true of x - as long as we have 'true' [Halbach]
     Full Idea: Quantification over (certain) properties can be mimicked in a language with a truth predicate by quantifying over formulas. Instead of saying that Tom has the property of being a poor philosopher, we can say 'x is a poor philosopher' is true of Tom.
     From: Volker Halbach (Axiomatic Theories of Truth (2005 ver) [2005], 1.1)
     A reaction: I love this, and think it is very important. He talks of 'mimicking' properties, but I see it as philosophers mistakenly attributing properties, when actually what they were doing is asserting truths involving certain predicates.
27. Natural Reality / A. Classical Physics / 2. Thermodynamics / b. Heat
Work degrades into heat, but not vice versa [Close]
     Full Idea: William Thomson, Lord Kelvin, declared (in 1865) the second law of thermodynamics: mechanical work inevitably tends to degrade into heat, but not vice versa.
     From: Frank Close (Theories of Everything [2017], 3 'Perpetual')
     A reaction: The basis of entropy, which makes time an essential part of physics. Might this be the single most important fact about the physical world?
27. Natural Reality / A. Classical Physics / 2. Thermodynamics / c. Conservation of energy
First Law: energy can change form, but is conserved overall [Close]
     Full Idea: The first law of thermodynamics : energy can be changed from one form to another, but is always conserved overall.
     From: Frank Close (Theories of Everything [2017], 3 'Perpetual')
     A reaction: So we have no idea what energy is, but we know it's conserved. (Daniel Bernoulli showed the greater the mean energy, the higher the temperature. James Joule showed the quantitative equivalence of heat and work p.26-7)
27. Natural Reality / A. Classical Physics / 2. Thermodynamics / d. Entropy
Third Law: total order and minimum entropy only occurs at absolute zero [Close]
     Full Idea: The third law of thermodynamics says that a hypothetical state of total order and minimum entropy can be attained only at the absolute zero temperature, minus 273 degrees Celsius.
     From: Frank Close (Theories of Everything [2017], 3 'Arrow')
     A reaction: If temperature is energetic movement of atoms (or whatever), then obviously zero movement is the coldest it can get. So is absolute zero an energy state, or an absence of energy? I have no idea what 'total order' means.
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 1. Relativity / a. Special relativity
All motions are relative and ambiguous, but acceleration is the same in all inertial frames [Close]
     Full Idea: There is no absolute state of rest; only relative motions are unambiguous. Contrast this with acceleration, however, which has the same magnitude in all inertial frames.
     From: Frank Close (Theories of Everything [2017], 3 'Newton's')
     A reaction: It seems important to remember this, before we start trumpeting about the whole of physics being relative. ....But see Idea 20634!
The electric and magnetic are tightly linked, and viewed according to your own motion [Close]
     Full Idea: Electric and magnetic phenomena are profoundly intertwined; what you interpret as electric or magnetic thus depends on your own motion.
     From: Frank Close (Theories of Everything [2017], 3 'Light!')
     A reaction: This sounds like an earlier version of special relativity.
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 1. Relativity / b. General relativity
The general relativity equations relate curvature in space-time to density of energy-momentum [Close]
     Full Idea: The essence of general relativity relates 'curvature in space-time' on one side of the equation to the 'density of momentum and energy' on the other. ...In full, Einstein required ten equations of this type.
     From: Frank Close (Theories of Everything [2017], 5 'Gravity')
     A reaction: Momentum involves mass, and energy is equivalent to mass (e=mc^2).
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 2. Electrodynamics / a. Electrodynamics
Photon exchange drives the electro-magnetic force [Close]
     Full Idea: The exchange of photons drives the electro-magnetic force.
     From: Frank Close (Theories of Everything [2017], 6 'Superstrings')
     A reaction: So light, which we just think of as what is visible, is a mere side-effect of the engine room of nature - the core mechanism of the whole electro-magnetic field.
Electric fields have four basic laws (two by Gauss, one by Ampère, one by Faraday) [Close]
     Full Idea: Four basic laws of electric and magnetic fields: Gauss's Law (about the flux produced by a field), Gauss's law of magnets (there can be no monopoles), Ampère's Law (fields on surfaces), and Farday's Law (accelerated magnets produce fields).
     From: Frank Close (Theories of Everything [2017], 3 'Light!')
     A reaction: [Highly compressed, for an overview. Close explains them]
Light isn't just emitted in quanta called photons - light is photons [Close]
     Full Idea: Planck had assumed that light is emitted in quanta called photons. Einstein went further - light is photons.
     From: Frank Close (Theories of Everything [2017], 3 'Light!')
     A reaction: The point is that light travels as entities which are photons, rather than the emissions being quantized packets of some other stuff.
In general relativity the energy and momentum of photons subjects them to gravity [Close]
     Full Idea: In Einstein's general theory, gravity acts also on energy and momentum, not simply on mass. For example, massless photons of light feel the gravitational attraction of the Sun and can be deflected.
     From: Frank Close (Theories of Everything [2017], 5 'Planck')
     A reaction: Ah, a puzzle solved. How come massless photons are bent by gravity?
Electro-magnetic waves travel at light speed - so light is electromagnetism! [Close]
     Full Idea: Faradays' measurements predicted the speed of electro-magnetic waves, which happened to be the speed of light, so Maxwell made an inspired leap: light is an electromagnetic wave!
     From: Frank Close (Theories of Everything [2017], 3 'Light!')
     A reaction: Put that way, it doesn't sound like an 'inspired' leap, because travelling at exactly the same speed seems a pretty good indication that they are the same sort of thing. (But I'm not denying that Maxwell was a special guy!)
In QED, electro-magnetism exists in quantum states, emitting and absorbing electrons [Close]
     Full Idea: Dirac created quantum electrodynamics (QED): the universal electro-magnetic field can exist in discreet states of energy (with photons appearing and disappearing by energy excitations. This combined classical ideas, quantum theory and special relativity.
     From: Frank Close (Theories of Everything [2017], 3 'Light!')
     A reaction: Close says this is the theory of everything in atomic structure, but not in nuclei (which needs QCD and QFD). So if there are lots of other 'fields' (e.g. gravitational, weak, strong, Higgs), how do they all fit together? Do they talk to one another?
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 2. Electrodynamics / b. Fields
Quantum fields contain continual rapid creation and disappearance [Close]
     Full Idea: Quantum field theory implies that the vacuum of space is filled with particles and antiparticles which bubble in and out of existence on faster and faster timescales over shorter and shorter distances.
     From: Frank Close (Theories of Everything [2017], 6 'Intro')
     A reaction: Ponder this sentence until you head aches. Existence, but not as we know it, Jim. Close says calculations in QED about the electron confirm this.
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 2. Electrodynamics / c. Electrons
Electrons get their mass by interaction with the Higgs field [Close]
     Full Idea: The electron gets its mass by interaction with the ubiquitous Higgs field.
     From: Frank Close (Theories of Everything [2017], 6 'Hierarchy')
     A reaction: I thought I understood mass until I read this. Is it just wrong to say the mass of a table is the 'amount of stuff' in it?
Dirac showed how electrons conform to special relativity [Close]
     Full Idea: In 1928 Paul Dirac discovered the quantum equation that describes the electron and conforms to the requirements special relativity theory.
     From: Frank Close (Theories of Everything [2017], 3 'Light!')
     A reaction: This sounds like a major step in the unification of physics. Quantum theory and General relativity remain irreconcilable.
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 4. Standard Model / a. Concept of matter
Modern theories of matter are grounded in heat, work and energy [Close]
     Full Idea: The link between temperature, heat, work and energy is at the root of our historical ability to construct theories of matter, such as Newton's dynamics, while ignoring, and indeed being ignorant of - atomic dimensions.
     From: Frank Close (Theories of Everything [2017], 3 'Arrow')
     A reaction: That is, presumably, that even when you fill in the atoms, and the standard model of physics, these aspects of matter do the main explaiining (of the behaviour, rather than of the structure).
27. Natural Reality / B. Modern Physics / 5. Unified Models / a. Electro-weak unity
The Higgs field is an electroweak plasma - but we don't know what stuff it consists of [Close]
     Full Idea: In 2012 it was confirmed that we are immersed in an electroweak plasma - the Higgs field. We curently have no knowledge of what this stuff might consist of.
     From: Frank Close (Theories of Everything [2017], 4 'Higgs')
     A reaction: The second sentence has my full attention. So we don't understand a field properly until we understand the 'stuff' it is made of? So what are all the familiar fields made of? Tell me more!
27. Natural Reality / C. Space / 6. Space-Time
Space-time is indeterminate foam over short distances [Close]
     Full Idea: At very short distances, space-time itself becomes some indeterminate foam.
     From: Frank Close (Theories of Everything [2017], 6 'Intro')
     A reaction: [see Close for a bit more detail of this weird idea]
28. God / A. Divine Nature / 6. Divine Morality / c. God is the good
God is love [John]
     Full Idea: God is love.
     From: St John (23: First Epistle of John [c.90], 4.16)
     A reaction: Used by Ayer as an example of meaningless religious language (see Idea 5209). One might translate it as 'the existence of God is a necessary condition for the existence of love in the universe'. Like matter is needed for gravity. Not totally meaningless!
29. Religion / D. Religious Issues / 1. Religious Commitment / a. Religious Belief
If you love the world, then you do not love the Father [John]
     Full Idea: Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
     From: St John (23: First Epistle of John [c.90], 2.15)
     A reaction: This strikes me as an essentially wicked teaching, and one step on the road to suicide. The rejection of life is the worst aspect of all religions - surely it is obvious that we should try to make the best of life, not turn our backs on it?