The process of bringing forth creative ideas may be like digging in the ground. But some seem to have got it down to a fine art. To some extent it may be possible to improve by practice but it does seem that some are so much better naturally — Jack Cummins

Creativity is just a word for a platonic abstraction of a mind process we share with all living animals of bringing to action or to words hidden meaning arising from deep forms of thought not directly available to conscious awareness. The creative process is autonomous until we choose to exercise it by force, digging directed with purpose and intent for extended periods. My wife fixed up a poetry closet for herself to shut out the world while she mulled over, wrote, revised and rewrote. A friend walks in the park in the mornings telling children's tales to a voice recorder. My best ideas pop into awareness out of the abyss when I lie in bed in the middle of the night seeking to get back to sleep.

performance is measured according to standards and is also an act of communication — Jack Cummins

Creation is a struggle to bring to light ideas that might emerge from the formless depths of one's mind. Some ideas are merely new rearrangement of cultural memes and these can be judged according to some odd standards. Ideas that truly brake new ground will not be judged.

For a photon, which has no mass and always travels at the speed of light, distance and time only exist from the perspective of the observer: to a photon there is no such thing as distance and time, once it's emitted, it reaches its destination instantly in zero time. — staticphoton

For the photon without distance and time how can there be speed of any kind? Is the photon everywhere at once?

↪jorndoe
Thanks for the maps.

Reuters give some more detail: they cannot supply Kherson well enough for its defence; they are afraid to lose too many men for nowt.

"Russia abandons Ukrainian city of Kherson in major retreat ~~ By Mark Trevelyan LONDON, Nov 9 (Reuters) — Olivier5

According to the maps, the Zaporizhzhia high dam which has a hydroelectric plant and supplies water to Crimea is now in the Ukrainian controlled area. Nevertheless, either side is capable of blowing up this dam at any time. The immediate result would be a wall of water carrying debris cascading down the Dnipro valley washing everything in its path into the Black Sea.

The Russian withdrawal to the South could be a recognition of a stalemate along the river caused by the presence of this threat, as neither side can occupy Kherson without incurring the possibility of great loss of men and equipment at any time.

(2.) We know our action in an unfiltered way. — KantDane21

(2) equivocates "our" in meaning. Not all action can be known. My action may or may not be filtered to me but other actions are always filtered.

In other news, A surprisingly near black hole about 10 times more massive than our Sun has been found just 1,560 light-years from Earth, which is about as far as the Orion Nebula. Gaia BH1, is part of a binary star system whose other member is a Sun-sized star about as far from its companion black hole as Mars is from the Sun.

^^^
It's for real. :(

That's an interesting perspective you have there. — Agent Smith

It's the perspective of most scientists, if you ask them.

The JWST hasn't made any startling new discoveries. :groan: I expected a paradigm shift event to occur. Looks like the JWST is nothing more than an upgraded HST. All that Sturm und Drang, for nothing! Maybe it's too early to comment ... astronomical data take time & money to process. Gotta be optimistic! Oui mes amies? — Agent Smith

theory ... is just a set of rules and equations ... [however] a mathematical model cannot answer the questions of why there should be a universe for the model to describe. ― Stephen Hawking — noAxioms

Scientists are sometimes quick to leap to hyperbole when singing the praises of their megabucks projects even if results can only be seen in comparative charts or new equations. But the JWST goes far to appease the astronomical amateur community by taking telescope time to give enthusiasts just what they've aimed to see in decades of stargazing on cold silent dark moonless mountain tops.

The universe was here first. We're just visiting for a short while seeing what we can see. Science is a tour guide pointing here and there. Most people are too busy with just staying alive or seeking daily comforts to notice. But then what's life for?

that's one way to think about the multiverse I guess — ssu

The multiple universe models are driven by mathematical logic as extensions of cosmological theories. The parameters of those theories turn out to be just numbers that happen to work for us, but are they necessary or just lucky? Could they have been some other way? Of course, any other way we would not be here to ask, but the numbers and the implied universes (read logical realities) that might have been simply wouldn't care. Does our presence bias our views on the matter so that reality boils down only to that which makes it possible for me to type this sentence?

If we can model our reality better with multiverse models than without, then why wouldn't it be science?
Everybody ought to understand that it's a model of reality, not reality itself. — ssu

There is a reality for each and every model, as implied and expressed by the models. Not the other way around. Choosing to call one of these realities 'reality itself' or 'really really real' is a personal choice no matter how many people are convinced otherwise.

This BBC article pushes some of the same facts, but much of it is still speculative due to the paucity of legitimate military sources.

Hopefully Putin gets a day older each day until he doesn't.

In February, Putin met with Xi in Beijing. Now, Xi will meet Putin somewhere in Central Asia just a month before Xi is poised to cement his place as the most powerful Chinese leader since Mao Zedong.

Meaning what?

Fair enough, and so is everyone else. :brow:

Something coming from nothing doesn't make sense.
And the idea of this world of space and time always having existed also doesn't make sense.
If anything, this world existing is self-contradictory.
"When you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the case." — Yohan

After eliminating the possibility that the world 'exists', however you take that word, something else must be the case. No?

May not be as hot as airport infrared body images :gasp: but this link gets into how they might be spotting the earliest high-redshift galaxies with near-infrared observations of originally ultraviolet light.

With my view many paradoxes (Zeno, Dartboard, Liar's, etc) are easily resolved — keystone

I take it you must mean dis-solved?

There are physicists who believe the universe is infinite — T Clark

With circular reasoning. Perhaps a label for endless but not quite infinite in a physical sense ?

Never could a continuum be decomposed into points — keystone

For physics, isn't that the driving force behind quanta, to put a stopper into space leaking out ?

Hubble and Webb will work together to showcase the universe across multiple wavelengths of light.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1567204230464684033

Thoughts? — Kuro

Is my wastebasket a set ?

Sounds about right because the world of all that exists should not be a mathematically flat set ?

It seems unlikely that the fundamental nature of snow changes with the light. — RussellA

Yes. Realism demands that objects have fixed properties just so lack of contradiction can distinguish truth from falsity. This is etched in stone. Appearances can be true or false subjectively and they can change therefore are unreliable, but can be classified and named as are the colors of the rainbow. When there are many rather than just one then the logic of contrariety takes the place of contradiction. This means if not this one then any one of the others without contradiction. This, I think, is a useful logical test and proof for properties.

Based on this thinking, white is not a property but just the most commonly seen appearance of snow. The truth of the alternative colorless or translucent snow is based elsewhere in the stronger language of some applied branch of science. Unfortunately this leads away from the OP topic which presumes truth for T-sentences.

Tarski in "snow is white" is using "is" to mean "has the property", in which case "snow is white" is analytic.
To say "snow is black on a dark night" is a synthetic proposition, as it can be expanded to "snow which has the property of being white appears black on a dark night" — RussellA

Analytic-synthetic judgment comes with logical difference. Snow is black shocks because it is contradictory to white and thus supposedly logically impossible. Since black is not impossible white cannot be an analytic property of snow. Now if snow is translucent and cannot logically be otherwise then 'snow is translucent' is analytic. Translucent is a real property of snow while all natural appearances of snow color are only contrary within a range and are synthetic. This cuts through the confusion caused by Tarski's example. Tarski's theory might or might not work but this example undermines his intentions and questions his understanding of Kant. (or else I'm blowing bubbles ?)

So yes, the T-sentences are not a theory of truth, at least in that they do not tell us which sentences are true and which false, but which sentences have the same truth value. — Banno

A one-to-one translation from object language to another language then gets us nowhere, truth value remains unaffected, and a truth maker ϕ is still to be sought. What else could constitute a truth maker for any proposition of an object language?

You brought up the metaphor of a Russian doll with each layer being more inclusive thereby more physically powerful. And you mentioned the idea of logical power. I think metaphysical power might give for those T-sentences material adequacy. What do you think?

Tarski himself used an analytic proposition "snow is white" — RussellA

How is this an analytic proposition? Because if it is taken to be analytic then it is circular at best and shows nothing. However, if it is synthetic then its truth is under-determined because whenever observed by whatever method snow is hardly ever white.

EDIT: I should add that I see the problem of circularity in the IFF. I don't think the arrow can go both ways. It only shows redundancy in the method, schnee is not needed.
EDIT:I notice that if the example was 'snow is colorless' or 'translucent' my objection would fail. Adding white to snow is a synthetic addition to my more modern understanding because on a dark night snow could be black instead.

I think she is just has learnt that the old rules apply and are useful. — ssu

I gather most of us confuse the higher moral expectations of Scandinavians with our own looser standards? If Sanna Marin is ousted as PM would you think that she will come back and be elected by popular vote as President a year from now?

What's the difference between seeing the sheet and seeing the sheet-as-sheet? — creativesoul

Sheet-as-sheet is stronger :strong:

Astronomers are cosmic historians. — Agent Smith
actually this question and tim woods response makes me question whether the study of the evolution of the universe is actually 'history'. The web definition of history is 'the study of past events, particularly in human affairs e.g. "medieval European history". — Wayfarer

I think the word "history" is used to create the illusion of science, by the authors. By calling it "history", the metaphysics which consists of speculations about the early universe. is presented as if it might be science. — Metaphysician Undercover

Narratives are spawned from current culture, that of the many, for simple widely acceptable public Wittgensteinian consumption, else from private reflection and imagination based on what each of us finds useful to make some sense of our cultural and experiential immersion in the universe. What generally goes can not be expected to make much sense to any of us in particular, because no one corresponds to us or "our place in the universe". Otherwise math and science that surprise and shock us with discoveries of eddies of the unknown would have no place in our world.

Apparently the PM has now been chastised and pledged an end to partying — boethius

Absurd, isn't it? Perhaps now she will get the paparazzi following she deserves for having put Finland on the map again. Fame and notoriety are the same when it comes to getting publicity, as long as they spell her name correctly. Just look at Zelenskiy for an example for how much public awareness can be worth for a country. Otoh, if she were French would anyone bat an eye?

Webb telescope reveals unpredicted bounty of bright galaxies in early universe
"if the profusion of early galaxies is real, astronomers may have to fundamentally rethink galaxy formation or the reigning cosmology."

JWST might be able to detect galaxies less than 200 million years after the Big Bang at redshifts greater than 20, but these galaxies will likely be faint and hard to find. Super bright early galaxies are not predicted by the theory of galaxy formation or by any cosmological theories. Either the observations will prove to be mirages by later followups or one or both major theories will have to be modified to accommodate the new finds.

It was a weird choice of name to begin with, like renaming a scenic bridge after a local politician's father including the first and last name. Cyclops would have been more appropriate imho.

JWST’s “Shrodinger’s Galaxy Candidate” Has Astronomers Very Puzzled
CEERS-1749 is either the earliest and most distant galaxy ever seen by a long way, or an imposter looking curiously far more distant than it really is.https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.02794
The data suggests two potential locations for the CEERS-1749

Rohan Naidu ~~~ It isn’t always the excitement, sunshine, and rainbows often perpetuated through the media. Challenging current knowledge takes bravery and the collective hard work of dozens, if not hundreds, of passionate scientists. All options must be examined for the truth to be revealed."

Considering their advanced knowledge and science there wouldnt be all that much we would have to offer them (back) in the first place. Perhaps the best we could hope for is for such visitors to be non-invasive scientific explorers who actually come in peace. — Seeker

Maybe we should expect little green intelligent robots built for the longevity of space voyages but who would come without superfluous morality chips. They would quickly learn to communicate with us leading to serious negotiations with our leaders. Then we would have to gauge the truth content of their utterances. Perhaps all they wish for is our labor for who knows what end and we wouldn't like to be trading our lives and efforts for handfuls of glassy beads they can freely manufacture onboard from atmospheric CO2.

It depends on whether the aliens have any resources that we can exploit — absoluteaspiration

Or would it be more likely that they come to exploit whatever they can find here? Somehow they will have achieved technology that we can only dream up to have gotten here in the first place. Many episodes of early Star Trek demonstrated in thought how vulnerable we might be with our primitive brains and machines.

matters of science — Changeling

is a slippery slope. Many physicists and philosophers deny that psychology is a science by either physicists' or philosophers' standard, or for that matter by the standards of research psychologists themselves. But they're all wrong. Science is what science does.

Folks have been looking for a real world example ever since whichever pedant it was raised the 'grue' thing, and you have found it! My heartiest commiserations! — unenlightened

Ignorance is bliss.

..

Identity is normally taken in two ways, as existing in one frozen moment in time, and as existing throughout time. — Count Timothy von Icarus

Whether particulars are momentary or fixed can be seen as the key difference between Plato's and Aristotle's philosophy. For Plato, particulars participate in fixed Forms to gain momentary identity changing gradually from moment to moment.

The changing object of perception retains its identity throughout, but how can that be? Perceptions are not fixed, neither is the material object. A clay statue of Hermes can weather or be painted over or have its protrusion severed and it's still the same statue. Something similar happens with a bed. Any bed is a bed until it becomes firewood.

The main metaphysical concern is the mechanism for participation of the forms. One suggestion is that mathematicals mediate in logical steps. This may seem excessively speculative, but a variety of intermediates happen every time one of us gets a reply on these forums. To exchange ideas using keyboards, displays with programmed electronics and electromagnetic waves directed between is more complex.

What you think as indisputable fact? — dimosthenis9

I am, but I'm not so sure about you.
This universe is in motion but there could be others.
All is physically connected but in a limited way.
Although it looks this way, it is likely neither true nor false because the universe is relative and multi-valued.
Without artificial things simple dialectic is worthless. Why would anything have identity or a name?

We are relatively stupid beings, but (paradoxically) we are intelligent enough to discover stumble upon interesting things we can't understand — alan1000

Which gives rise to the obviously correct supposition that mathematics is empirically based. Possibilist and fictional but still empirically biased.