Global Vistas: Recent Comments

Comment on Robert Kennedy & Barack Obama by Gene Mason

2008-10-28T13:49:22Z

Thanks for reading the article and commenting on it. If there were more "funny prone" people like you I'd try to make a living at it. G

Comment on Robert Kennedy & Barack Obama by Gene Mason

2008-10-27T22:30:15Z

You're funny!But still 'born too smart for this world'....The X

Comment on Quantum Baseball by Jonathan Weisbuch

2008-07-19T17:59:18Z

Jon,
I published you comment on Fred's comment, with a couple of corrections.
Gene

Comment on Quantum Baseball by Jonathan Weisbuch

2008-07-19T17:40:20Z

I will have to admit that Dr. Fleron puts his hand clearly into the mitt of the problem. How can these diverse concepts of quantum and Newtonian physics, be stitched together over Einstein's relativistic Space-Time orb. It is the last that holds the two conflicting notions of reality, neither of which are really true, into a vague simulacrum of our universe.

Were ours a strict Newtonian Universe, one could easily take all the velocities, inertiae, momenta, angular velocities, masses, rotational forces, Bernouilli effects, the forces exerted by wind, humidity, temperature, and whatever thermodynamic effects (enthalpy and entropy) which might have been imparted to the ball by the pitcher's arm, body, legs, and mind, and calculate the exact flight of the struck ball. But that, of course would get us no closer to the outcome of the event, than we were prior to our mathematical gymnastics. As Einstein taught us, this is not a Newtonian world, but a bent space, where perception is a relative function of the position and velocity of the observer. And since in the normal baseball game, there are legion observers, players, umpires, managers, teammates, and fans, nothing that is calculable in the Newtonian sense can ever be exactly perceived by all observers. The science of ballistics does not apply in the context of the At-Bat phenomenon.

In a sense, this simple confrontation that takes place between our "Boys of Summer," thousands of times a day, is a metaphor for the entire cosmos.. To paraphrase Walt Whitman, "One can see the universe in a tiny grain of wound string covered with horsehide (actually cowhide, in today's world -- nothing is sacred). The distal and the proximal causes all coalesce in that minute fraction of a nano-second when swinging bat meets spinning ball; all the precedents, sex or abstinence, alcohol or steroids, will or luck, compound in a frenzy of quantum activity the outcome of which will appear differently to all who witness the event. Fans on one side will be pleased, or even elated, on the other, the reverse. Close calls will be argued for years, and few will agree with the umpire.

This is the relativity of the quantum act of baseball, operating with and without Newton, in a universe that is only partially understood, and may not even be real.

Jonathan Weisbuch

Comment on Quantum Baseball by Jonathan Weisbuch

2008-07-15T12:47:48Z

Newton’s ‘At Bat’: More Thoughts on Quantum Baseball by
Fred Fleron
    Quantum Baseball—what a great idea! Jonathan Weisbuch’s creation should be
of great interest to physicists and baseball fans alike (not that the two categories are
mutually exclusive). For both the layman and the baseball fan, his argument is quite fine
as it stands. For the physicist and philosopher of science, however, there is one part of
his argument that requires some clarification. He correctly identifies both Newtonian and
Non-Newtonian Quantum factors in the 'at bat'. But let’s draw out that difference a little
further.
    There are, after all, two quite different events to be explained. The first event is
what happens when the batter steps into the batter's box and the pitcher pitches the ball.
Weisbuch calls this (quite appropriately) the at bat. The second event to be explained
is what happens to the ball once the batter connects with his/her bat. These are two
quite different events, and therein lies the rub. The latter can be explained in purely
Newtonian terms, but the former cannot. Why is that the case?
    Once the bat connects with the ball, none of the factors discussed in Weisbuch’s
4th paragraph (beginning 'Non-Newtonian, quantum factors . . .') are relevant. Those
factors are sometimes called distal conditions, antecedents or causes because, as
Webster's puts it, they are Aremote from the point of attachment or origin, from a point
conceived of as central,' as when the bat strikes the ball. In contrast, proximate
conditions, antecedents, or causes are 'very near' or 'immediately adjoining' (again,
quoting Webster's). Thus, a proximate cause is 'a cause that directly or with no mediate
agency produces an effect,' for example, whether or not the ball is wet, where the bat
strikes the ball, how hard and at what angle the batter swings the bat, and all other
factors present when the bat meets the ball.
    Now it is regarding this third point (how hard and at what angle the batter swings
the bat) that the separation between distal and proximate causes becomes rather gray. I
have heard it said that athletes should not have sex the night before (not to mention the
morning of) the big performance because of its enervating effect. Assuming this is true,
and not just an old wives' tale, the batter sans sex may impart more energy to his swing
and, thus, strike the ball with greater force than if he had engaged in sex less then 24
hours prior to the game. Ceteris paribus, sex is a distal antecedent condition that may
have a direct impact on the outcome of the 'at bat.' But once the bat hits the ball, sex or
no sex is irrelevant. Thus, while the results of the 'at bat' may be quantum in nature,
where the ball ends up after it makes contact with the bat is very much a Newtonian
calculation. Hence, it is not only important, but crucial to distinguish between two very
distinct phenomena in baseball: the 'at bat' and where the ball ends up. The former is clearly
a quantum calculation; but the latter is purely Newtonian in nature (and in baseball).

Comment on Dr Weisbuch Recent Congressional Testimony

2008-05-17T20:51:11Z

Dear Rev.,
I approved and published the comment you made to Dr. Weisbuch's article. If you have not yet "subscribed" to the blog, please do so.
Gene L. Mason

Comment on Dr Weisbuch Recent Congressional Testimony

2008-05-17T15:31:01Z

My thanks to Dr. Weisbuch for his comprehensive statement supporting HB 676.

"Cosmetic surgery" needs to be carefully defined to provide help for people like the indigent woman I saw with a large bulbous tumor on her face.