3 ms·

New can be 1. something without a predecessor, 2. synthesis of other ideas that creates totally new application or theory

marviel 4y ago
Can you provide an example of 1? I think there are definitely some out there that feel almost "singular" in the way you describe, but each time I try to find a non-predecessor item I end up feeling "nope there are still dependencies"
- testrun 4y ago
  Relativity for instance. New does not exclude dependencies or partial predecessors. New is something that is totally different from before.
  - vidarh 4y ago
    Relativity comes from exploring the problem of the incompatibilities of pre-existing theories and experiments. I don't see anything that suggests it requires anything more than synthesis and a stochastic process to explore the gaps and inconsistencies. In terms of timing, they're the culmination of decades of pre-existing work, with e.g. the Lorentz transformations named the same year Einstein published his paper on special relativity.
    - testrun 4y ago
      Lorentz transformation is not relativity. I think we might have a problem with definition and understanding what we try to accomplish with this discussion. If I understand you correctly, then stochastic processes will create an all knowing environment if you give it enough time. I think that is false. Most of the time it is true, but there are points in time where there is a leap in knowledge that are not reachable by just iteration.
      - vidarh 4y ago
        > Lorentz transformation is not relativity. Not the point. The point being that there was a number of precursors, not some sudden insight from nothing. > If I understand you correctly, then stochastic processes will create an all knowing environment if you give it enough time. I think that is false. Most of the time it is true, but there are points in time where there is a leap in knowledge that are not reachable by just iteration. This presumes that there's no element of randomness in that stochastic process, which is not a sound assumption.

marviel 4y ago

Can you provide an example of 1? I think there are definitely some out there that feel almost "singular" in the way you describe, but each time I try to find a non-predecessor item I end up feeling "nope there are still dependencies"

testrun 4y ago
Relativity for instance. New does not exclude dependencies or partial predecessors. New is something that is totally different from before.
- vidarh 4y ago
  Relativity comes from exploring the problem of the incompatibilities of pre-existing theories and experiments. I don't see anything that suggests it requires anything more than synthesis and a stochastic process to explore the gaps and inconsistencies. In terms of timing, they're the culmination of decades of pre-existing work, with e.g. the Lorentz transformations named the same year Einstein published his paper on special relativity.
  - testrun 4y ago
    Lorentz transformation is not relativity. I think we might have a problem with definition and understanding what we try to accomplish with this discussion. If I understand you correctly, then stochastic processes will create an all knowing environment if you give it enough time. I think that is false. Most of the time it is true, but there are points in time where there is a leap in knowledge that are not reachable by just iteration.
    - vidarh 4y ago
      > Lorentz transformation is not relativity. Not the point. The point being that there was a number of precursors, not some sudden insight from nothing. > If I understand you correctly, then stochastic processes will create an all knowing environment if you give it enough time. I think that is false. Most of the time it is true, but there are points in time where there is a leap in knowledge that are not reachable by just iteration. This presumes that there's no element of randomness in that stochastic process, which is not a sound assumption.