What did Wittgenstein mean by saying that
This topic contains 74 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by 
Reg the Fronkey Farmer 8 months ago.
-
What happens if you boogie in zero-gravity?
I like that musical choice. Still hoping to honor Unseen’s question, albeit in my eccentric way, I geeked out math/science-wise to analyze (hey oops that rhymes) to self-edumacate me-self on the riffy part that I like, that looooong bendy note on the guitar. Funny thing, the song seems closest to the key of E but it’s actually a quarter tone out of pitch from the standard A = 440Hz scales, meaning one has to fudge with one’s frequencies to play along “in tune”. (I don’t mind if Robert corrects me here.)
Anyways, it seems that the long, procrastinating bend bends from the about B-flat to about the 5th (B). I really like that note, but will save y’all from further, psycho-acoustic analysis. (Another aside: Various musical scales and their emotional effects are amazingly intertwined with mathematically predictable frequencies and harmonies. Never mind.)
So closer to on-topic, I think it’s a pretty big deal that even science requires us to constantly re-evaluate and re-document what we know, because we can’t possibly know at first all the possible circumstances and outcomes wrt a particular study of a phenomenon, so we are limited to describing particular reproducible circumstances and outcomes, which (btw) happens to still be extremely useful/effective in our mortal quests to understand “reality”, whatever that is. (Like, what is it, really, and will it seem different later when we further extend the borders of reproducible circumstances?) Shout out to Simon for pointing out the “more than one cause” perspective, in contrast to reductionist idealism wrt scientifically documenting the fewest possible document-able causes and effects–which btw are ultimately the most reproducible by humans across disciplines, cultures, geography, and even the purported non-humans residing in other planetary systems.)
Now, in honor of the latest “scientific attempt” of a flat-earther to prove once and for all for himself whether Earth is flat or “a ball” (from Discovery):
Discover How a Homemade Astronaut Takes Flight with Mad Mike
And from WaPo:
‘Mad’ Mike Hughes, who wanted to prove the flat-Earth theory, dies in homemade-rocket disaster
(Unseen I hope you’re not disappointed with this diversion… it’s just that sometimes I feel like everything in reality and human experience is “connected”. Especially today, for some reason. But I’m still pretty sure I’m not being superstitious.)
My older daughter just now responded “Darwin was right”.
-
This reply was modified 8 months ago by
PopeBeanie. Reason: extra-late typo fixes and betterized grammer & style
What happens if you boogie in zero-gravity?
I like that musical choice. Still hoping to honor Unseen’s question, albeit in my eccentric way, I geeked out math/science-wise to analyze (hey oops that rhymes) to self-edumacate me-self on the riffy part I like, in that looooon bendy note on the guitar. Funny thing, the song seems closest to the key of E but it’s actually a quarter tone out of pitch from the standard A = 440Hz scales, meaning one has to fudge with one’s frequencies to play along. (I don’t mind if Robert corrects me here.) Anyways, it seems that long, procrastinating bend bends from the about B-flat to about the 5th (B). I really like that part, but will save y’all from further, psycho-acoustic analysis. (Another aside: Various musical scales and their emotional effects are amazingly intertwined with mathematically predictable frequencies. Never mind.) So closer to on-topic, I think it’s a pretty big deal that even science requires us to constantly re-evaluate and re-document what we know, because we can’t possibly know at first all the possible circumstances and outcomes wrt a particular study of a phenomenon, so we are limited to describing particular reproducible circumstances and outcomes, which (btw) happens to still be extremely useful/effective in our mortal quests to understand “reality”, whatever that is. (Like, what is it, really, and will it seem different later when we further extend the borders of reproducible circumstances?) Shout out Simon for pointing out the “more than one cause” perspective, in contrast to the idealism wrt reducing scientific studies to documenting the fewest possible documentable causes and effects-which btw are ultimately the most reproducible by humans across disciplines, cultures, geography, and presumably by non-humans residing in other planetary systems.) And now, in honor of the latest “scientific attempt” of a flat-earther to prove once and for all for himself whether Earth is flat or “a ball” (from https://www.discovery.com/exploration/discover-how-a-homemade-astronaut-takes-flight-with-mad-mike): Discover How a Homemade Astronaut Takes Flight with Mad Mike
And from WaPo: ‘Mad’ Mike Hughes, who wanted to prove the flat-Earth theory, dies in homemade-rocket disaster (Unseen I hope you’re not disappointed with this diversion… it’s just that sometimes I feel like everything in reality and human experience is “connected”. Especially today, for some reason. But I’m still sure I’m not being superstitious.) My older daughter just now responded “Darwin was right”.Yes, there seems to be a deterministic connection between idiocy and a statistical tendency toward early death. However, in this case his death was, I believe, caused by a parachute problem. Of course, maybe the idiot, in addition to believing the Earth is flat, also believed that there’s no right way to pack a parachute.
-
This reply was modified 8 months ago by
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.