Abstruse Gibberish!
Sample X:
[quote=Wikipedia (Quantum Physics)]In the mathematically rigorous formulation of quantum mechanics, the state of a quantum mechanical system is a vector [math]{\displaystyle \psi }[/math] belonging to a (separable) complex Hilbert space [math]{\displaystyle {\mathcal {H}}}.[/math] This vector is postulated to be normalized under the Hilbert space inner product, that is, it obeys [math]{\displaystyle \langle \psi ,\psi \rangle =1}[/math], and it is well-defined up to a complex number of modulus 1 (the global phase), that is, [math]{\displaystyle \psi }[/math] and [math]{\displaystyle e^{i\alpha }\psi }[/math] represent the same physical system. In other words, the possible states are points in the projective space of a Hilbert space, usually called the complex projective space. The exact nature of this Hilbert space is dependent on the system – for example, for describing position and momentum the Hilbert space is the space of complex square-integrable functions [math]{\displaystyle L^{2}(\mathbb {C} )}[/math], while the Hilbert space for the spin of a single proton is simply the space of two-dimensional complex vectors [math]{\displaystyle \mathbb {C} ^{2}}[/math] with the usual inner product.[/quote]
Sample Y:
[quote=thinkzone.wlonk.com (Gibberish generator)]To be, or to takes, when we have, the slings and their currents turn awry, and lose the mind to sleep to sleep of death what dream: ay, the question: whether bear the mind to sleep; to suffer the name of office, and them? To die: to sleep; no more; and enterprises of great pith a bare bodkin? Who would bear the oppressor's wrong, the heart-ache and scorns of great pith a bare bodkin?[/quote]
First things first, not many will get the point I'm trying to get across since many forum members seem educated enough to see the sense in sample X. Speaking for myself, reading sample X gives me a headache; simply put nec caput, nec pedes. I'll have to make myself the test subject.
Turning to sample Y, this too is all Greek to me but note that it's authentic gibberish (the algorithm that generated it claims so).
Sample X (not gibberish) is identical to sample Y (gibberish) with respect to my comprehension ability (both are incomprhensible).
In a sense then, (high levels of) abstraction = gibberish!
Questions:
1. Is there such a thing as gibberish or nonsense? You could be like me, reading/listening to something far more complex and abstract than your mind can handle.
The other side of the coin,
2. Are abstractions, the kind you see in math, physics, philosophy and other intellectual disciplines, inherently meaningless gibberish?
[quote=Wikipedia (Quantum Physics)]In the mathematically rigorous formulation of quantum mechanics, the state of a quantum mechanical system is a vector [math]{\displaystyle \psi }[/math] belonging to a (separable) complex Hilbert space [math]{\displaystyle {\mathcal {H}}}.[/math] This vector is postulated to be normalized under the Hilbert space inner product, that is, it obeys [math]{\displaystyle \langle \psi ,\psi \rangle =1}[/math], and it is well-defined up to a complex number of modulus 1 (the global phase), that is, [math]{\displaystyle \psi }[/math] and [math]{\displaystyle e^{i\alpha }\psi }[/math] represent the same physical system. In other words, the possible states are points in the projective space of a Hilbert space, usually called the complex projective space. The exact nature of this Hilbert space is dependent on the system – for example, for describing position and momentum the Hilbert space is the space of complex square-integrable functions [math]{\displaystyle L^{2}(\mathbb {C} )}[/math], while the Hilbert space for the spin of a single proton is simply the space of two-dimensional complex vectors [math]{\displaystyle \mathbb {C} ^{2}}[/math] with the usual inner product.[/quote]
Sample Y:
[quote=thinkzone.wlonk.com (Gibberish generator)]To be, or to takes, when we have, the slings and their currents turn awry, and lose the mind to sleep to sleep of death what dream: ay, the question: whether bear the mind to sleep; to suffer the name of office, and them? To die: to sleep; no more; and enterprises of great pith a bare bodkin? Who would bear the oppressor's wrong, the heart-ache and scorns of great pith a bare bodkin?[/quote]
First things first, not many will get the point I'm trying to get across since many forum members seem educated enough to see the sense in sample X. Speaking for myself, reading sample X gives me a headache; simply put nec caput, nec pedes. I'll have to make myself the test subject.
Turning to sample Y, this too is all Greek to me but note that it's authentic gibberish (the algorithm that generated it claims so).
Sample X (not gibberish) is identical to sample Y (gibberish) with respect to my comprehension ability (both are incomprhensible).
In a sense then, (high levels of) abstraction = gibberish!
Questions:
1. Is there such a thing as gibberish or nonsense? You could be like me, reading/listening to something far more complex and abstract than your mind can handle.
The other side of the coin,
2. Are abstractions, the kind you see in math, physics, philosophy and other intellectual disciplines, inherently meaningless gibberish?
Comments (7)
As I made clear, I'm the test subject. There are things that I clearly can't understand even though the high IQ demographic can, with little effort I might add.
Then there are what to me is downright nonsensical (stuff like the one generated by an algorithm, vide OP).
Gibberish has no meaning, comprehension is N/A. Abstruse topics/subjects/discourse has meaning, it's just that I can't wrap my head around it.
The point though is what's the difference between failure to understand and there being nothing to understand? The answer is in the question itself, yes, but I was just wondering if abstraction could itself be a distinct variety of nonsense or, on the flip side, could "nonsense" be abstraction taken to new heights?
:lol:
It's not gibberish, it's Swahili!
Glosslalia/speaking in tongues? I wonder if it's relevant.
Limbo! or, as the moderators like to call it, The Lounge.
Quoting Goldyluck
Wikipedia has an entry or try Googling. The internet will do a better job of explaining it than I possibly can.
In connection to a thread on Theodicy.