Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!qantel!hplabs!sri-unix!mikes@AMES-NAS.ARPA
From: mikes@AMES-NAS.ARPA
Newsgroups: net.physics
Subject: none
Message-ID: <431@sri-arpa.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 20-Jul-85 19:55:06 EDT
Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.431
Posted: Sat Jul 20 19:55:06 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 25-Jul-85 04:14:34 EDT
Lines: 55

From:  mikes@AMES-NAS.ARPA (Peter Mikes)

 The origins of the prefix META where aptly described on this net. I will use 
 the modern meaning here as it occurs in metamathematics. In general, the
 metastatement is a statement about the statement and this use goes back
 to Russel's theory of types exposed in his Principia (For further adven-
 tures of these beginnings of metamath see book: Godel-Escher-Bach). 
 So - in this sense the postings about the way the discussion on the
 net.physics is conducted and what should be on it, is a metaposting and this
 is one of those. ( Of course, the previous paragraph, describing what a
 metaposting is, was a meta-meta-posting -- I hope you do not mind too much).

  There seems to be four categories of posting on the net:

EF: Experimental Facts such as wondering about why lightning comes in bursts
    and how to magnetize one's oil plug.  Both data and offered explanation 
    are sought in generaly accepted manner - the encyclopedia aspect of the net.
TF: Theoretical Facts involve more or less professional discussion within the
    framework of currently accepted theories. This is what Mayank expressed in-
    terest in - but I have seen few of those so far.
TS: Theoretical Speculations are about things which you do not find in the 
    (current) textbooks. That's what makes them interesting to me. They  deal
    with undefined and nebulous concept such as 'grainy gravity' and 
    possible resurrection of ether and (of course) unorthodox interpretations
    of QM and many more. These topics apparently irritate many EF and TF peo-
    ple and I really wonder if anybody else, out there, wants to read those.
      ( this is a real question - please comment to net or directly to me)
ES: Experimental Speculations includes issues, such as fork bending, where the
    existence of the effect is an issue. (Don't forget that this is a meta-
    statement - it says nothing about Geller). It sometimes includes some 
    pretense of theory ( As an example I will quote a famous 'psychic 
     healer' who said:" ..during the 'whatever psychic effect' the emg and gra-
    vitational forces are suspended so that weak and strong forces can 'do 
    the job'..." end of quote.) but 'theory' is so far remote from usual method
    of physics that it should be classified as para-physics  or pata-physics
    (if accepted as theory at all). 

 Now - if you read so far, you find that this is really a flame in disguise:
  Somebody said that ES should be kept here to prevent excessive rigidity.
   History of science (another category I would love to see more of) records
   many cases of excessive rigidity ( e.g. plate tectonics, jumping genes,
   Languimier(?) isotherm for adsorbtion of gases (which was rejected partly
   becouse Einstein&co could not imagine QM basis of Van der Walls forces,
   cataclysmic theory of evolution (yes - I mean some Velikovsky's ideas) and
   many more were rejected by majority and eventually resurrected (sometimes
   with apology, sometimes quietly). However, I do not recall a single case
   in which ES ever lead to a positive development in science. Is there any?
   So - please- DO NOT put together ES and TS - they do differ. End of flame.

    I will prefix my eventual future postings in the TS category by the TS
  (e.g. re: TS: FTL...) to spare those souls, who believe that physical theo-
   ries are created and delivered by storks, the mental anquish of reading and
   thinking about problems with no preaproved answer. It may reduce the calls
   for splitting the net. I like the disorganized and uneven mix of the net -
   it is a refreshing antidote to a specialized journal or a conference.