As soon as one feature is found by which 2 objects differ from one another, we must identify them as distinct. Let us take air as an example. Air in front of background air still looks like nothing. Even though air is a legitimate object, it remains hidden as long as its surrounding background, to which it is compared, is also air. Air has no feature that could distinguish it from background air. Legitimate real objects, which lack any feature, by which they could be distinguish from their background and/or other objects, are called imperatively hidden objects (IHO) because no kind of measurement can help to distinguish them in any way as an object, which is something other than its background. If objects like air, uniform magnetic field or gravitational force are omnipresent and uniformly distributed they remain imperatively hidden objects because we have no phase that is not the object, which would allow us to distinguish it as an object. An object before a background of the same object remains an imperatively hidden object unless we find an instance, which varies from the object, maybe in strength, because we need something to compare it with to identify a difference.
The only way by which an omnipresent uniform hidden object can be discovered is if there is some variation in strength or it can become totally absent (e.g. gravity). Otherwise, it remains imperatively hidden because it cannot be distinguished from itself, the environment or other objects. Therefore, in order to uncover imperatively hidden objects, we must intentionally induce variation in the surrounding environment, measurements and methods until new features, by which the object can be distinguished from its environment and/or other objects, can be discovered.
If we can advance our conceptual understanding of air being not the same as its background because of wind, which causes a variation in resistance by which air slows down our motion, air still looks like air. But we know that air consists of at least four very different groups of objects, i.e. 20% oxygen, 78% nitrogen, 1.5% helium and 0.5% carbon dioxide. Now these four objects are no longer imperatively hidden but they appear like a single object. When trying to predict molecular behavior we will get errors because what we think of as one object is actually at least four. By looking, sonar sounding, radiating, magnetizing or shining light on air, we cannot distinguish the four objects from one another yet. But if we start cooling them down gradually, suddenly we can distinguish them from one another by their different freezing temperatures.
Well, I have read carefully your detailed text. The last sentences about the air being a mixture of atoms and your sentences about this fact, hint towards considering :
-composite material modelings
This is well studied, you will find references about alloys, layered materials made of different source materials to reach a target set of properties: heat/temperature , strength, electrical insulation /conduction
-homogeneisation
This engineering method starts from heterogeneous systems and finds an homogeneous equivalent.
-statistical physics or thermodynamics as you prefer : phase transition and "border of region"
Equipotential and iso-level regions (any field) looking for extremum...
Hope this helps
Hi Thomas, I do not think that it is a good example because its objective audience (measured by considering the means used) is probably in an upper level of rationals.
As a linguist I feel the piece a tiring reading, but I could use it to teach falsifications to kids enrolled in middle schools. I would use it as a semi-parable to teach Zero-N languages. To me, the title is the confession of the fictional game (addressing kids). Hopefully you would have had a funny time machining and typing the comedy.
;)
- Badges
- Science topic