![[F]](../_images/site.gif) New York Times on the Web Forums  Science
Russian military leaders have expressed concern about US plans
for a national missile defense system. Will defense technology be
limited by possibilities for a strategic imbalance? Is this just SDI
all over again?
    (1760 previous messages)
rshowalter
- 07:21am Mar 30, 2001 EST (#1761
of 1766) 
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu
Dirac makes a point about axiomatic systems -- that
is, systems based on assumptions dirac_10
3/29/01 9:42pm
The point is that no axiomatic system of a complexity useful to
humans is provably either complete or consistent.
The word "axiom" has a high status tone, but all it really
means is
" assumption - clearly stated, and held to be
self evident."
I recall being taught that.
Also more down-to-earth advice. I was taught that Godel's proof
was a fundamental statement of the principle, well known to
soldiers, that
" You cannot pull yourself out of your own
a**hole.
" How on earth would you do so? You can't even
think about it -- you have no "tools" -- the notion just doesn't
make sense.
For similar reasons, because there are no "solid connections" an
axiomatic system can't be self checking.
rshowalter
- 07:22am Mar 30, 2001 EST (#1762
of 1766)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu
At the same time, also in the course of being taught to use
Godel's proof, I learned this memory aid about the word
"assumption."
assume -- makes an ASS out of YOU and ME
an axiom is an assumption.
****
The objections to proof by axiom do not apply at all to the
process of CHECKING, by a matching process, against data - FOR
CONSISTENCY.
Checking can never show "absolute consistency, with no other
possible interpretation" to a complete philosophical certainty.
But it CAN show inconsistency and that is disproof,
by any reasonable standard I've ever heard expressed.
Checking for facts and logic, by a matching process, with
witnesses able to see, is essential, when arguments matter. In the
United States, and elsewhere, that kind of checking is often barred
from the game, whenever anybody in power objects.
rshowalter
- 07:24am Mar 30, 2001 EST (#1763
of 1766)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu
rshowalter
3/29/01 7:58pm
rshowalter
3/29/01 7:44pm
rshowalter
3/29/01 8:09pm
lunarchick
- 08:01am Mar 30, 2001 EST (#1764
of 1766)
lunarchick@www.com
A point re satellites having missiles:
There'd be a high chance of them blowing up on lauchpad - 1 in
four is it?
The Satellites could be knocked off in orbit .. and as for
communications, conventional ones are being re-visited.
lunarchick
- 08:07am Mar 30, 2001 EST (#1765
of 1766)
lunarchick@www.com
Forget the fancy stuff:
Land mines - every 20 minutes a land mine blows .. a left over
from an old conflict .. and an innocent person, child, civillian is
subjected to the LOSS of their leg. This is tragedy. An unnecessary
tragedy. In part it is fixable -- by REMOVING the mines. There are
two types, metal and plastic. James Cooke Uni, up the track, have
spent 8 years working on a detector to remove the new plastic mines.
It's pretty much ready for action for relief in Cambodia, Angola, a
former iron curtain war zone of old.
Science can help humanity!
rshowalter
- 08:33am Mar 30, 2001 EST (#1766
of 1766)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu
Science DOES help humanity!
And if we could talk together better, and cooperate better, we'd
be able to USE what science already knows, and learn new stuff, in
ways that would make the horrors of the world much less.
FACTS - like the facts about landmines - can motivate action once
they are believed.
  
 
New York Times on the Web Forums Science
Missile Defense
Enter your response, then click the POST MY MESSAGE
button below.
See the quick-edit
help for more information.
| 
