Evolving perspectives of ‘science’ and ‘technology’
There are a couple of very powerful sentences in this article that I like. Both of them relate to how we perceive the universe, and how we believe the universe “works”.
Theoretical physicist John Archibald Wheeler has coined the phrase it from bit to convey the idea that the entire universe is the result of a series of yes-or-no choices that take place at the level of quantum mechanics.
I agree with these thoughts and believe that humans underestimate our ability to ’cause’ the universe. Consider the possibility that humans have the ability to cause quantum decoherence more than we believe. This is an area that borders on what we call “faith” …
“Scientific theories are more properly viewed not as discoveries but as human constructions. It’s already happening in physics: Philosopher of science Andrew Pickering suggests that the quark, which in its unbound state has not – and some say cannot – be observed, should be regarded as a scientific invention rather than an actual particle.”
This is another spin on the same theme. Consider the possibility that we create stories about the world that we perceive … and that these stories are then ‘true’ due to the fact that we live that they are true. This is often a very difficult concept for people to accept. It places considerable responsibility on the individual and the community. It would mean that we are where we are because of who we are being, and what we believe.
Most people are more comfortable being a ‘victim of the world’, instead of owning what they have created. We are starting to learn that maybe there is proof that Wheeler is accurate in his models …
The Computer at Nature’s Core. Think technology is just applied science? You’re wrong. It’s the other way around. A commentary by David F. Channell from Wired magazine. [Wired News]
