This is part II to my previous post on subjectivism in science. The last part for those of you wanting to catch up, explored the mechanisms by which subjectivism creeps into scientific literature and also ways to alleviate it. Part II will explore subjectivity in observation or more generally, observation bias – from a practical and metaphysical standpoint.
you interact to perceive
mutual exclusion is nothing but an illusion
Scientific instruments are limited to their resolution, accuracy and precision. An instrument can only resolve within finite numerical intervals, only being able to gauge some metric with some degree of statistical consistency. The fixed numerical gaps between which an instrument can register is called its resolution. All instruments have a resolution that is predetermined from design – and probably something you can expect to find on the back label. Accuracy and precision are parented in statistics. The ability of the instrument to consistently register close to some numerical value is called precision, while its ability to register closer to the actual numerical value is called accuracy. The keywords are highlighted.
We made it! This tangent will explore entropy from a very philosophical standpoint (you’ll later understand why), therefore I won’t be spitting out equations unless I really have to, but let’s just hope it doesn’t come to that. So what is entropy? In all essential terms, entropy is really just the unique state of a system at some arbitrary time. This unique state can only move in one direction – from ordered to disordered as work is done by this system on its immediate surroundings. Entropy can move backwards – from disordered to ordered if work is done on the system by its surroundings. But what makes entropy truly fascinating and mysterious is it’s unpredictability – the quantum chaos observed in every system in the physical universe. This chaos is one that cannot be fully quantified because it would then violate the Second Law (of Thermodynamics) as we know it. Why does it violate said law? Because we can then turn back time, technically. By knowing the kinetic state and positions of particles in a system, we can easily treat the quantum particles as classical ones and apply our knowledge of classical mechanics to extrapolate the state of some particle in the system to some arbitrary time, which will allow us to manipulate the system’s disorderliness without doing any actual work on it – which is counter-intuitive and in violation of the Second Law.
Any system being governed by another entity cannot fully understand the entity that’s controlling it