Skip to main content

Inside a Sun, Inside a Black Hole

Image result for black holes


I've heard that Auguste Comte, the founder of positivism, used the issue of the chemical composition of the Sun to illustrate his idea of questions that could not be answered.

Since it is obvious (in Comte's view) that we can never get a sample from the inside of the sun to test, we can never know what it is made of, and such an inquiry should be written off as "metaphysical," not positive.

Silly philosophers, eh? It is very easy in hindsight to say that Comte shouldn't have been so dogmatic about the possible reach of human knowledge, or the specific means by which chemical composition can be determined.

What about the inside of a black hole? Can we say anything definitive about THAT? If so ... how? since we can't go there? Or, if anyone of us could get within the "event horizon" for a time, we couldn't get information back.

In a recent blog post, a physicist, Sabine Hossenfelder, considers whether the question of the contents of a black hole ought to concern physicists, or anyone who philosophizes about physics. She is of the view, in general, that physicists should not speculate about that which is in principle unobservable, such as the other universes in a "multiverse". But she does NOT see the inside of a black hole as in the same boat, because, she writes: "no one really thinks that the inside of a black hole will remain inaccessible forever."

We are in Comte's position, then, Unable to see how we COULD get such information. But if we are wise we won't jump to the conclusion that we can't.

But I'm not sure I grok her point: she wants to say that the black hole situation is very different from that of the other universes. But could we not treat them both the same, and regard ourselves as Comte both times?

This claim certainly lit up the comments section of her blog in an enlightening way.
Labels:

Comments

  1. HenryJuly 18, 2019 at 6:26 AM

    I don't understand why Comte would view the question of the chemical composition of the sun as "metaphysical." Clearly, it is empirical and, in his day, could not be answered for purely practical reasons.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ChristopherJuly 18, 2019 at 10:48 AM

      Henry,

      All I know is what he said on the subject, which was quite clear.

      "On the subject of stars, all investigations which are not ultimately reducible to simple visual observations are ... necessarily denied to us. While we can conceive of the possibility of determining their shapes, their sizes, and their motions, we shall never be able by any means to study their chemical composition or their mineralogical structure ... Our knowledge concerning their gaseous envelopes is necessarily limited to their existence, size ... and refractive power, we shall not at all be able to determine their chemical composition or even their density... I regard any notion concerning the true mean temperature of the various stars as forever denied to us."

      Only 14 years after he wrote those words, a physicist named Gustav Kirchhoff made the critical breakthrough in the analysis of light to determine the composition of its source.

      http://www.faculty.virginia.edu/rwoclass/astr121/comte.html

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a maj...
9 comments
Read more

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak...
17 comments
Read more

Recent Controversies Involving Nassim Taleb, Part I

I've written about Nassim Taleb on earlier occasions in this blog. I'll let you do the search yourself, dear reader, for the full background. The short answer to the question "who is Taleb?" is this: he is a 57 year old man born in Lebanon, educated in France, who has been both a hedge fund manager and a derivatives trader. He retired from active participation from the financial world sometime between 2004 and 2006, and has been a full-time writer and provocateur ever since. Taleb's writings for the general public began where one might expect -- in the field where he had made his money -- and he explained certain financial issues to a broad audiences in a very dramatic non-technical way. Since then, he has widened has fields of study, writing about just about everything, applying the intellectual tools he honed in that earlier work. As you might have gather from the above, I respect Taleb, though I have sometimes been critical of him when my own writing ab...
4 comments
Read more