On Friday, March 15, 2013 1:14:53 PM UTC+11, sperm...@yahoo.com wrote: > On Friday, March 15, 2013 12:43:27 PM UTC+11, 1treePetrifiedForestLane wrote: > > > that always happens to me. thank you; > > > > > > I was trying to spell prolegomenon; so, What -- > > > > > > what means? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Reality transcends language. Language in fact hinders a true understanding of the real. > > > > > > > > > > > > thus: > > > > > > sham--EVEN THOUGH IT WORKS- it is philosophically absurd and endsin > > > > > > meaninglessness.It becomes a mystery-that needs to be solved- as towhy > > > > > > maths works in the practical world when it ends in meaninglessness > > > > you say > > "What -- > > what means? > > > > > Reality transcends language. Language in fact hinders a true understanding of the real" > > > > http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/books/philosophy/Decentred1.pdf > > > > "Reality transcends language" means > > quote > > The very words physicists use to describe reality constrains their knowledge of it and scientists in every field will one day encounter this barrier to human understanding? (Niels Bohr in A, Wick, The Infamous Boundary, Birkhauser Berlin, 1995, p.33.) > > > > " Language in fact hinders a true understanding of the real" means > > > > "we are limited by our language to lists of words much as our worldly experiences limit the concepts those words bring to mind.? With this in mind Zajak points out that we naively apply to the micro world concepts which only have applicability in the macro world. Electrons don?t behave like mini billiard balls and light does not behave like scaled down sea waves. As Zajak notes ?particles and waves are macroscopic concepts which gradually lose their relevance as we approach the submicroscopic domain.? (H.Zajak,. Optics, Addison Wesly Publishing Company, New York., P. 449"