Arminus - Is it possible that you are occupied by your idea?
Sanjay - Quite possible. That happens to everyone. The trick is being able to entertain other or even opposite ideas at the same time. That is what objectivity is.
Arminus - By whom or what are they made? By God(s)? By nature?
Sanjay - By nature/existence itself.
Arminus -By nature? Do you have evidence?
Sanjay - What else evidence is required when we see it happening all around automatically!
Arminus - Show us your evidence, Zinnat
Sanjay - Arminus, I was talking about definitions, and they do not have evidences. Definitions are proposed benchmarks for any thing, real or imaginary.
I think that perhaps you are asking for the explanations for different definitions of nano. Though, I have provided in the last post but let me put those again in simpler way.
There are two different scales; micro and nano. Micro means 10-6 while nano means 10-9, if we go by the original propagators of the concepts. But, over the time, the term nano is used more like a metaphor for all small things, instead of its true definition.
We have only breached micro level successfully do far, not nano level. The attempts are on to make and control nano level things. Yes, we can now measure events at nano level under some artificially enforced extreme circumstances. That is our actual present status.
But, what happens sometimes in popular media and even in scientific circles too, that things are either misrepresented or blown out of the proportion. Such futuristic claims are made which are impossible. And, it is not my opinion only but many others also share it, including experts of that field, as I quoted in my previous posts too.
The term nanotechnology is more a metaphor than a reality. Almost all below 1 mm things are being called as nano and that process is nanotechnology, whether they are of the scale of 10-9 or not.
For instance, nonstick taflon coating on the utensils is now claimed to be done by nanotechnology. Tennis rackets are being claimed to be made by nanotechnology. But, strictly speaking, all these claims are false.
When we are unable to make and control even a single nano thing in normal circumstances so far, how these things can be claimed as being made by using nanotechnology!
But, the problem is that most of the people do not understand this. They get the false impression of the reality.
Arminus -But why do you not tell us your definition of “observation”? If you do not do it, then we have and are going to go on with our definition.
Sanjay - I have been given already. Perhaps you did not notice. Here it is again -
Here in this thread, observation is slightly different or one step ahead from what we understand in science. Scientific observation means gathering the information and process it. But, here observation includes cognitive effects too.
Like, a robot can observe and analyze the loss if one of its leg would break but that incident would not manifest any feeling in it. On the other hand, if the same would happen to anyone of us, we would observe the pain also besides our other physical damages.
With love,
Sanjay
