The Universe

The Universe.

There can be no scientific account of the universe. 

Consider an experiment that might be conducted in any introductory physics class.  We have a block/ and a plane that we can expand to different angles.  The plane has equidistant lines along its surface.  We have a stop watch/ and a scale for measuring the angle of the plane.

Our stop watch blips at periodic intervals.  We set the plane at a particular angle/ say 30 degrees.  At each blip/ we observe and record the measured position of the block on the plane.  We run this experiment several times/ and we graph the results of the experiment in a two dimensional space/ one axis being time and the other being space.  It now looks like we have a mathematical picture of some isolated thing existing in "space and time."

But what does it mean for the particle to be at a particular location in space?  It means that it is at a particular place with reference to our ruler.  What does it mean for the block to be observed moving at a certain time?  It means that we observe the motion of the block with respect to our stop watch.  We compare one physical process/ the one we are measuring/ with another physical process that is not measured.

In any quantitative endeavor/ there always has to be a reference point by which we measure something.  If we are talking about time/ we need a clock/ and we have to take what the clock shows as being infallible.  If we are talking about space/ we need the functional equivalent of a meter stick.  We regard what the meter stick shows to be infallible.  We can never measure our standard in as much as we are treating it as the standard.

It is easy to be confused here.  I can measure the length of a meter stick/ and I can measure my clock/ for example/ how long it takes for the hour hand to move from one point to another point.  The clock could be fast or slow.  However/ if I measure my clock or my meter stick/ I must take another physical system to serve as an infallible standard of measurement.  When we say it is infallible/ this is not a statement about knowledge/ it is a statement about our attitude toward the measurement standard. 

Measurement presupposes a standard that cannot itself be measured.  It is defined a priori.  What is measured is measured with reference to the standard. 

A meter is defined as the length of the path traveled by light in a vacuum during a time interval of 1/299792458th of a second.  We cannot empirically determine how long that distance is/ it is a definition.  In order to apply the definition/ we require a clock that shows the correct time.   We cannot measure how long a physical process occurs within our clock: the clock tells time.  Because the clock tells time/ we can measure how long another physical process occurs by measuring it with reference to our clock.  In order to quantitatively define anything/ we have to define a physical paradigm by which we measure other things with respect to that aspect.  The physical paradigm cannot itself be measured.  The physical paradigm is not capable of empirical description.

We do not change our standards of measurement because they are shown to be wrong.  We change our standards of measurement because we develop other standards of measurement that are shown to be more precise.

When we measure something/ we give a description of the thing measured relative to the standard of measurement.  When we determine how long something is/ we determine the length in approximate ratio to the path light travels in a vacuum over a certain time interval as measured by an infallible clock (e.g. our paradigm clock).  When we give the time interval of a physical process/ we talk about the physical process in reference to another physical system/ our clock.

Quantitative science presupposes a normative system of measurement standards.  The standards of measurement cannot be described empirically.  They are defined.  Science can only deal with the relationship of the parts.  The idea of the universe/ conceived of as a unified physical process/ has no place in the scientific description.  I should want to say that if one can come to believe in the universe/ then belief in God should be no trouble.  He (or she) is the person standing outside the universe checking his metaphysical watch.