Thursday, December 10, 2009

2 Ontology Papers

1. I discovered on the web the writings of Ian Thompson. He is a physicist by career but someone who is also well versed in philosophy and has been setting out his own stance on things metaphysical. In “Power and Substance” he says some things I thought made a lot of sense. He likes the idea that dispositional properties (or powers) are ontologically essential. He sets out an argument that dispositions could be taken to constitute a substance rather than as properties. I am intrigued by this argument, but agnostic about it on first reading. What I really liked (hopefully not just because I agree) is his take on how a dispositions-based ontology comports with the picture of quantum physics (section 6).

First, he introduces the notion of propensity as the probabilistic incarnation of a disposition. He says QM equations may be describing something he calls a propensity field. He then says: “The only things that exist are propensity fields and the inter(actions) they produce.” The interactions are events, so the propensities fields exist “for” events. Then comes this good passage:
Such events are characterized generically as ‘actual events’, because they have definite properties once they exist, and are selections between distinct possibilities that are arrayed like a field. In quantum mechanics, these actual events are just the process of “reduction of the wave packet’ that physicists and philosophers have long discussed and sought for both theoretically and experimentally.

2. Jonathan Schaffer (who must be one of the best contemporary analytic metaphysicians) has another draft paper posted called: “The Internal Relatedness of All Things”. In it he explores another avenue for defending priority monism (in addition to those contained in this paper).

The key argument goes that if there is some internal relation among things in the cosmos (resulting from shared causal history, spatio-temporal relatedness or some other factor); if, in other words, you cannot perform a “free recombination” of parts; then, a logical chain of reasoning leads to the conclusion that the whole of the cosmos is prior to its parts.

I don’t see any reason to disagree with his reasoning given the premises. However, I do disagree with one of his seemingly not-very-controversial premises: that is, that the common conception of our concrete cosmos can be considered the object which plays the role of the “whole” in priority monism. The dependence of actual things is not only on adjacent actual things, but crucially on possibilia which go beyond the actual (local neighborhood) cosmos.

1 comment:

Dale Ritter said...

Thanks to the writing of Steve Esser we have the concepts of Ian Thompson on the propensity field and it's qualities. This very idea has been reduced to the algebraic topological system of the probability field composed of probablons. This model may be used to map the set of virtual forcons onto the spacetime manifold of the atom's outer energy cloud by writing the correlation function in terms of momentum, then integrating for {Gravity-Time} boundaries.

These recent advancements in quantum science have produced the picoyoctometric, 3D, interactive video atomic model imaging function, in terms of chronons and spacons for exact, quantized, relativistic animation. This format returns clear numerical data for a full spectrum of variables. The atom's RQT (relative quantum topological) data point imaging function is built by combination of the relativistic Einstein-Lorenz transform functions for time, mass, and energy with the workon quantized electromagnetic wave equations for frequency and wavelength.

The atom labeled psi (Z) pulsates at the frequency {Nhu=e/h} by cycles of {e=m(c^2)} transformation of nuclear surface mass to forcons with joule values, followed by nuclear force absorption. This radiation process is limited only by spacetime boundaries of {Gravity-Time}, where gravity is the force binding space to psi, forming the GT integral atomic wavefunction. The expression is defined as the series expansion differential of nuclear output rates with quantum symmetry numbers assigned along the progression to give topology to the solutions.

Next, the correlation function for the manifold of internal heat capacity energy particle 3D functions is extracted by rearranging the total internal momentum function to the photon gain rule and integrating it for GT limits. This produces a series of 26 topological waveparticle functions of the five classes; {+Positron, Workon, Thermon, -Electromagneton, Magnemedon}, each the 3D data image of a type of energy intermedon of the 5/2 kT J internal energy cloud, accounting for all of them.

Those 26 energy data values intersect the sizes of the fundamental physical constants: h, h-bar, delta, nuclear magneton, beta magneton, k (series). They quantize atomic dynamics by acting as fulcrum particles. The result is the exact picoyoctometric, 3D, interactive video atomic model data point imaging function, responsive to keyboard input of virtual photon gain events by relativistic, quantized shifts of electron, force, and energy field states and positions.

Images of the h-bar magnetic energy waveparticle of ~175 picoyoctometers are available online at with the complete RQT atomic modeling manual titled The Crystalon Door, copyright TXu1-266-788. TCD conforms to the unopposed motion of disclosure in U.S. District (NM) Court of 04/02/2001 titled The Solution to the Equation of Schrodinger.