BTW Philip Morrison (Cocke’s PhD supervisor) taught my intro MIT physics course. It was first thing in the morning and I learned nothing :(
-
-
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 -
Replying to @drossbucket
I think “the-astronomical-analyzability-of-the-pulsar” just means that, in virtue of masses of theory and equipment, they were able to >
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @drossbucket
interpret the Fourier signal peak *as* a pulsar, although in material fact it was just a dot crawling upward on the oscilloscope.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @drossbucket
And I think by “again” they mean that C&D understood that this had to be reproducible
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
Ah I see, yeah the 'again' at the end was throwing me off too
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I think GLL are emphasizing here that the discovery is a process, whereby gradually the observed scope peak turns into an observed pulsar
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.