Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 23:27:28 +0000
From: Marc Afifi <mafifi@redshift.com>
To: Pinhole Listserv <pinhole@exploratorium.edu>
Subject: Re: Why questions
I'd like to begin by stating unequivocally that it is NOT my intention
to start or fan flames on this discussion group. I fear that my earlier
post in response to the discussion of the question why may have done
precisely that but it was absolutely not my intention. If that was the
result, I am truly sorry. Please take no offense to my writings, I
really do not intend any.
Ronald Wong wrote:
> Although any answer to the question would be purely speculative, there is
> nothing wrong in asking it. Philosophers do this all the time and so do
> students.
I agree with you Ron. There is absolutely nothing wrong with asking the
question "why?" and in fact this question has inspired many great
scientific theories that explain how things work, without ever
addressing the underlying, unanswerable question, why? This question is
a matter of argument, not a matter of discovery.
[deleted the very interesting comparison of Newtonian vs Einsteinian
explanations of gravitation]
>From this standpoint, the planets move the way they do because, by nature,
> they are following the shortest path through space-time.
Isn't this a lot like saying "because that's the way it is?" I suppose
one could argue that the statement "by nature" does not have the same
finality as the statement "because that's the way it is," but it seems,
in my humble opinion, remarkably similar. The _observation_ is that
planets move in elliptical orbits and the _explanation_ is that they are
moving through spacetime following the shortest possible path. Why do
they follow the shortest possible path? Why doesn't a massive body
produce a distortion of spacetime such that a cork-screw trajectory (for
example) is the shortest possible path? These are both unanswerable
questions -- though nonetheless interesting -- and great topics for
debate.
[more interesting discussion deleted]
> Who knows what the future holds but, if the past is any guide, we can
> expect our understanding of nature to continue to change in significant and
> profound ways.
No argument here. Though I always wonder what those mutual fund
companies mean when they say past performance is no guarantee of future
returns. Smiles.
> So, here's another point we as teachers can make when the opportunity
> arises - the idea that our understanding of what nature is is constantly
> changing - sometimes in profound ways.
Absolutely. This is very important and a wonderful way to inspire
students to continue their pursuit of knowledge.
> Which leads to one last point:
>
> There is a very strong sense of finality in the phrase, "...because that's
> the way it is.". As was mentioned in an earlier post, there are occasions
> when we are tempted to use it but, in light of the history of science, we
> should really refrain from doing so. By it's very nature, scientific
> activity continuously changes our understanding of what "is" is - making
> what "IT is" even more sublime in the process.
I appreciate your point of view. Perhaps a more encouraging answer to
the question would be "nobody knows." I don't have the same sense of
finality about the phrase that others may infer, but that's the problem
with language -- it is usually inadequate to convey true feelings. By
the way, I think Bill Clinton would be proud of your last sentence
above. Smiles.
> Speaking of enjoyable and rewarding, have a good summer ya'll.
>
> ron
And to you Ron. And to all the other pinholers out there. Enjoy.
-- Marc Afifi Physics and Chemistry Pacific Grove High School 615 Sunset Dr. Pacific Grove, CA, 93950(408) 646-6590 ext. 223
Favorite Oakland Raiders Motto: "Just When Baby?"