List, Kirsti:
> On Apr 7, 2016, at 3:15 AM, [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: > > But let me first ask you some questions, to help me formulate my answer. > > 1) You concentrate on chemical symbols. - How about chemical reactions? JLRC: My interest for several decades has been on the antecedent-consequent relation between a mutation and the change in an organism. How does it happen? Chemical symbols and chemical reactions (as biochemical processes) are necessary connections between the antecedent and the consequence. That being said, the pre-percept of all chemical symbols, today, is the chemical table of elements. All chemical processes, reactions, diffusion, bindings, transfers are expressed in terms of the components (nuclei and electrons) of the table of elements as ordinal and cardinal numbers. The chemical elements stand in strict one-to-one correspondence with the natural integers. This relationship gives closure on the relationship between matter and the sub-atomic components of matter (but not the sub-sub-atomic components of particle physics.) The perplex number system suffers one form of physical closure under this constraint. Valence opens the closure by material addition of atoms to form molecules. The logic of chemistry consists of propositional functions on atomic numbers with valence relations that creates new identities from atomic identities, constrained by physical laws. Thus, CSP’s logical doctrine of individuals. > > 2) Is geometry left out of the ways of posing the problem? Geometry enters into chemical thought secondarily as a consequence of arrangements of parts of the whole. The primary root of relations is the chemical table of elements and valences and other forms of interaction. That is, by secondary, I mean that one must have at least a pair of nodes to have a distance. And three nodes for an angle. The concept of a graph node pre-supposes chemical particles. Note that QM assumes that geometric relations exist among the parts of the whole of an atom and assign angles to relations to between orbitals on the basis of electrical relations between nuclei and electrons. Chemists measure angles between x-ray diffraction patterns and relate these to angles between atoms in crystals. At the material level of molecules the languages of chemistry, physics and mathematics use a common terminology but the meanings of the terms vary with the discipline. The diagrammatic logic of chemistry is COMPOSED from relations among ordinal and cardinal numbers as counts of electrons and nuclei. The diagrams can be interpreted by various physical measurements. In terms of handedness, note that the left and right hand forms have exactly the physical properties with respect to mass, electrical particles, bond structures and other physical attributes. The mirror images of the pair of optical isomers (handedness) is not predicted by physics laws per se. The specific arrangement discovered by Pastuer requires an arrangement of at least 5 separate and distinct “radicals” in a pattern such that the mirror images differ. (Today, the physical origin of optical rotation of polarized light is attributed to the rotation of the electrical field vector of a light ray by interaction with the five different “radicals”.) In short, the logic of physics and the logic of chemistry start with different pre-suppositions with regard to the nature of matter. Different symbolic antecedents results in different symbolic consequences. Hence, the different meta-languages of the two disciplines. In “Primary Logic”, M. Malatesta (1997), GraceWings, derives the distinctions in terms of the historical development of differences of logical notations. Cheers Jerry
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
