Here is the post hoc version of the discovery: interviews for pop-science audience. https://history.aip.org/history/exhibits/mod/pulsar/pulsar1/01.html … [ten web pages]
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness
I got completely derailed by this! Didn't know the story of the optical discovery, was cool to read about the tinfoil hack and 2*pi errors
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @drossbucket
Yeah, that’s really great. Fascinating both for its own sake and as nice examples of how science actually gets done: improvisationally!
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness @drossbucket
This skillful technical situated improvisation is a key aspect of “shop work,” which is critical & most theories of science overlookpic.twitter.com/e5FfNL01Kn
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @drossbucket
BTW Philip Morrison (Cocke’s PhD supervisor) taught my intro MIT physics course. It was first thing in the morning and I learned nothing :(
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness @drossbucket
This is trying to say: *to count* as science, C&G have to turn their messy improvised activity into a rational post hoc account.pic.twitter.com/K7MxCKGeEA
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @drossbucket
(I meant C&D here—Cocke & Disney, the pulsar discoverers)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @drossbucket
This is pointing at the impossibility of separating subject and object, as your post rightly flagged as centralpic.twitter.com/f8e7e02Nc2
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @drossbucket
(They credit this to Maurice Merleau-Ponty, who was the foremost phenomenologist of perception. His work is interesting but difficult)
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
Backing up slightly, what's with the long hyphenated phrases? E.g. 'the-astronomical-analyzability-of-the-pulsar-again'
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Garfinkel was a major weirdo, & also suffered from the Continental delusion that writing in weird ways would shake people out of fixed ideas
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness @drossbucket
Although the ‘weird’ makes sense if you read it as G’s struggling to do descriptions without filling them with ascriptions and assumptions.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @saul @drossbucket
Yup! Heidegger is similarly obscure cuz trying not to use standard philosophical vocabulary, which imports unwanted metaphysical assumptions
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.