Wednesday, April 4, 2012

Molecular physics: Suddens cannot exist as a whole

I have once again gotten into the argument about whether a Sudden can exist as a whole or only in halves. I accept the mathematical premise that two halves comprise all of something. However, I propose that when it comes to Suddens -- which exist in nature as the sole quirk of molecular physics ignoring all rules -- that it is impossible to combine them to make a whole. Thus, there can never be a whole Sudden but only compositions of halves of a Sudden.

Still I feel that the debate will rage on. I will attempt to make sense of the Sudden quandary herein but before doing so I have some petty annoyance which I wish to broach.

I have previously spoken about a language exam I took as part of a college course in which the query about sentence structure demanded that the test taker choose "which one is correct". I first eliminated "C - Both A and B" since that one response figuratively enveloped both sentences. I settled, after about 15 minutes of research and internal debate, upon A since the mood of sentence "A" was more reflective of the author's perceived intent while both sentences were structurally correct. When my answer was struck as incorrect I submitted this analysis to the professor. He quickly agreed that the test was flawed in that regard and noted that I was the first person to bring this to his attention in over 10 years of use of that quiz. I proposed rewording the demand to "select the response that you feel is most correct" and fired that off in an e-mail. No sooner did I send that then the banging my head against the wall in disbelief feeling overwhelmed me. I profusely apologized in a hastily written follow-up e-mail in which I proclaimed that feel should be struck and replaced with find. What was I thinking -- feel that a response to a structural quandary is correct. Jesus kayaking Christ on the Danube River you don't feel an answer to a logical question, you make a finding based upon the rules of composition and the information provided. Still, I often get stymied in conversation when I hear "what do you feel is the correct way . . ." while usually being able to proceed when "what do you feel is the best way . . ." is presented as best does not imply the finality of surety that correct does and therefore, in a sense, does allow for feeling. The quiz was changed to reflect the possibility of all three choices being correct.

I was recently talking to someone about speed and efficiency as it related to no longer having an automobile which I will elaborate on in its own post soon. I mentioned that it took exactly an hour for me to make the round trip from the court house to Kroger's and do my shopping. Then came the ire of one of my greatest annoyances -- having to repeat myself. Sure enough, this person asked, "Did that include getting back home?" If I lived at the court house it did. Regardless, I didn't answer. That conversation ended at that moment. Maybe I am the moron but I am not aware of a definition for round trip that does not include returning to the point of origin. Round trip does subtly imply more than there and back as it does relate to circularity and in a sense would involve use of a different return route. In its purest form a round trip would be the completion of one lap on a circle. However, in modern parlance there is no circular requirement. Still a round trip is more than there and back but not quite tour.

Finally came today and the true bane of logical interpretation and the greatest stress inducement in my life -- weather forecast of what is supposed to happen. Last night my mother called and discussed the chassis test going on at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway today. She mention that "it's supposed to rain in the morning but end by 11:00 a.m." Thus implying that I was going to get rained on while I rode my bicycle down here for my noon Life Coaching appointment with a client. I, naturally, was undaunted. My client raised the issue of his mother calling him and stating that he should change his weekend plans with his children to an indoor activity because "it's supposed to rain". "Remarkable!", I exclaimed then proceeded to recite the conversation I had with my mother last night.

To begin with quickly, forecast is to calculate beforehand. Supposed - in its verb form - is to believe or assume as true; take for granted. Forecast is a conjecture as to something in the future -- in contemporary usage is most often applied to weather in daily usage. However, its origins are based upon foresight in planning. Thus I feel, not find, that forecast is more accurately ascribed to measures based upon tangible past results such as profit/loss forecast by a business. Forecast can be used in the sense of to predict ahead of time based upon known and sure factual circumstances. Meteorologists, or "climactic atmospheric based entertainers" as I refer to those network television personalities, make weather predictions not forecast. Prediction carries the mood of a prognosticator along the lines of prophesy. Based upon the way many people treat their prognostications -- as though they were the divine words of a god upon which we must mold our lifestyles -- I do feel that prediction is more appropriate than forecast. Then there is supposed to which has surety of anticipated circumstances such as a 15tpi nut is supposed to fit on a 15tpi bolt. Supposed doesn't carry with it the full obligation through intent such as required but is closer in mood. Weather conditions are a natural phenomenon though. There is no contractual, moral, ethical or legal obligation by nature to do anything. I am going to stop there before I go into a diatribe about pessimistic personalities and belief structure or mathematical and probability underpinnings related to a prediction of a 30% chance of rain and the statement "it's supposed to rain . . ." By the way, it didn't rain today.

In conclusion I am returning to Suddens. As I said, I propose that Suddens ignore the laws of molecular physics and cannot be combined to form the whole or all. By its very nature a Sudden can only exist in nature in clear and distinct halves. Scientists using the Large Hadron Collider have still not been able to create a whole Sudden. Einstein gave up on it long ago. Yet, in our contemporary American culture there is a vast, and I believe, growing belief in the proposition of Sudden singularity. I don't buy into it though. I am steadfast in my belief that a Sudden occurs without transition from the previous state -- an abrupt change. So try it sometime when you hear a discussion about Suddens -- say "There cannot be all of one but only two halves of a Sudden."

Deer in the headlights. Mark my words!!!

If you would like to expand your opportunities in life, improve your health and realize your full potential then please visit my website and contact my scheduler to make an appointment to meet with me.

If you would like to follow my activities more closely then send a friend request to my Political FaceBook page.

Subscribe to this blawg.

More information about child custody rights and procedures may be found on the Indiana Custodial Rights Advocates website.

©2012 Stuart Showalter, LLC. Permission is granted to all non-commercial entities to reproduce this article in it's entirety with credit given.

No comments: