120 years later, we're still learning about Special Relativity!

 In class, we get into length contraction when it comes to Einstein's special theory of relativity. When objects move, their lengths shorten up by some amount in the direction of motion. This is a well-known conclusion from relativity. It is also really challenging to try and measure this at everyday speeds, because the length contraction is so tiny; not until a substantial fraction of the speed of light will it become more measurable. 

However, it turns out that what we would actually see is surprising and different from just a meter stick being a little shorter. We would see the stick, as a stationary observer with the stick flying past us really fast, rotate by some amount! This has to do with the behavior and tiny time differences of photons coming from the stick and reaching our sensors; it was calculated by two scientists about 20 years ago, and is called the Terrell-Penrose Effect. 

Now, with crazy-fast electronics and video technologies, this has actually been observed, and the real relativistic prediction confirmed, in the lab! This is a good Scientific American article, with some visuals, as to what it looks like for real! Very cool! 

Writing in the Age of AI - still need the wisdom of Socrates and Plato

 Why did Socrates not write anything down? What we know about Socrates and his thinking was written mostly by his student, Plato. 

Socrates and Plato understood that the best way to go after truth was through conversation and questioning; hence the Socratic method. Conversation allows us to question, pose possible answers, find contradictions and flaws in our thinking, critically and rigorously dive ever deeper into a topic, and so on, all is real time. Conversation provides a the best, most efficient and rigorous way to critically think through hard problems, and hopefully dig some nuggets of truth out of the problem. 

Writing is different, and not as efficient or effective. Certainly it takes longer. As we read something, we naturally (and hopefully) develop any number of questions, and needs for clarifications, and 'what if' scenarios. Reading something is open to interpretation, since we are unable to ask the author and get feedback; in so many ways, we need to try and read the mind of the author, and this requires assumptions and guesswork. The process of learning, and then questioning, and then refining our views and answers, may or may not fully happen if it is all through writing. 

Now we have AI. What would Socrates and Plato think about this? This article is interesting and provides some thoughts about it. I agree with the author of the piece that there is good and bad, depending on how we use the AI in writing. It can certainly write a student assignment or a paper we publish on websites or try to submit to other publications, and we do not have to do the heavy lifting thinking. That is NOT how we should be using AI. However, what the great philosophers would likely appreciate about AI is that it can be your debating 'partner'. You can have a conversation with an AI and do the equivalent of, or at least a good approximation, the Socratic method, where we can have a back and forth of questioning with the AI to better and more rigorously develop our thoughts. That type of use is not so different than having a human partner to debate and critically think with, and this makes AI a very useful tool in writing. 

Here are the 'Big 3' Greek philosophers that help create Western thought. Some 2500 years later, we still can use their thoughts and wisdom.

              From https://sidiropoulos.medium.com/socrates-plato-aristotle-2939c66b161f.