Thoughts Before The Alarm Sounds

It is wrong to think that the task of physics is to find out how Nature is. Physics concerns what we say about Nature . – Neils Bohr. Neils Bohr was a Danish physicist who made foundational contributions to understanding atomic structure and quantum theory. Although his model of the atom - a nucleus surrounded by orbiting electrons in discrete energy levels - has been supplanted by other models, another of his principles, complementarity, remains valid. Complementarity is the idea that certain events can be analyzed into two different and opposite descriptions. For example, depending upon how the physicist is viewing light, it can be thought of either as a wave or as a stream of particles. This situation occurs because we have no word to describe a single event which exhibits apparently mutually exclusive characteristics, consequently, we have a difficult time imagining how such an event can be possible. As Bohr stated it, “If anybody says he can think about quantum physi...

Although we seldom realize it, we are all party to an agreement which we entered into without our consent at the moment we spoke our first word. We all agree to speak a common language. This has worked reasonably well for thousands of years, and because it has done so well, it has not changed much, other than adding some new words and changing styles, for several millennia. The basic idea is that every thing or event – real, imaginary, solid, emotional, whatever – is relegated to a class, and when it is necessary to consider an individual entity, that entity is given characteristics which differentiate it from other members of the class. For example, Huey, Dewey and Louie are individual members of the class “ducks.” And classes are put into other classes – “ducks” is a member of the class “birds,” and “birds” is a member of the class “animals,” and so on. The ongoing events could have been classified in other ways. H,D and L could have been put into a class of two-legged animals, ...

Although I am not a member of the "speech police," I am annoyed that the media has recently adopted usages that I find irritating. I know that the English language changes over time, but I believe that changes should make sense. For example, Webster's Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary defines the word "troop" as: 1.) an assemblage of persons or things; company; band. 2.) a great number or multitude. I usually think of a troop as a group of boy scouts, state troopers or military personnel. As a result, when I hear the talking head say that more than 100 troops arrived home today, I imagine that the docks were inundated with thousands of soldiers, sailors or marines pouring out of a long line of ships. But this is media newspeak meaning that 100 service members, possibly a troop, arrived home today. Another example from Webster's: unique; 1.) existing as the only one or as the sole example; solitary in type or character. 2.) having no like or equal; un...