Re: Relativity and truth

On 12/25/2024 11:38 AM, Richard Hachel wrote:

It is a pity that men make so little effort when it is necessary to
discover the truth.
>
Very few men put their advantages after the truth.
>
"First, me".
>
It is so obvious when we look at the history of the world, of families,
of individuals, that we wonder how anyone can dare to contradict it.
>
But that is how it is. Society is made like that.
>
There are among us, people who doubt the relativity of time,
and the funniest thing is that those who do not doubt it, doubt what I
say myself, after forty years of honest and in-depth reflection on the
subject.
>
A person said today: "There is no relativity of time, it is absurd. Two
watches always mark the same time".
>
This person does not understand the theory, and the others do not
understand much more.
>
It's a bit like creating two solar watches, in the same place, in the
same factory.
>
They constantly mark the same time, when it's noon on one, it's noon on
the other, and vice versa.
>
But let's move one of the watches in space, and transport it to an
Eastern country.
>
We then notice that at the same time for the Parisian watch, the watch
transported to the East marks two hours more (the Earth turns from west
to east). For the other watch, it's the opposite, the Parisian watch
marks noon when it's two o'clock.
>
It's very easy to understand.
>
Well, that's how it is in relativity, there are things that are easy to
understand (anisochrony that I understood at 26 and in less than thirty
seconds) and others that are more complex (like the spatial zoom effect
that took me decades to fully understand, and which is the key to the
reasoning for the Langevin traveler).
>
What saddens me now is the all-out human stupidity.
>
People don't want to know (neither the cranks, nor the hypocrites, nor
the physicists, nor the philosophers).
>
They just want to preserve their interests, their arrogance, and their
fantasies.
>
R.H.

It seems you're looking first for a "theory of truth",
real truth, true truth, absolute truth, for itself,
then with regards to "pragmatist, coherence, correspondent,
fictionalist, nominalist, fallibilist, theories of truth".
What all of philosophy our canon and dogma has arrived
at, is that there's idealism, deductive, ideal truth, and then
there's the phenomenological, empirical, inductive, ideas
of the inter-subjective, scientific / not-falsified truth.
So, re-connecting theory with a cyclic metaphysics of a sort,
makes to re-attach a merest teleology, some "silver thread"
or a shastra a continuity, from real true truth, as via
some otherwise un-attainable yet profound Comenius language
of all truism and the Liar statement as a mere template of
contradiction, the teleology, then the great ontology,
all the inter-subjective theory toward an inter-objective theory.
This is that there is "A Theory", at all, one good true
consistent complete constant concrete theory, that we
all "attain" to.
Then also this gets into resolving all the "paradoxes of
logic and mathematics", so none remain, while yet having
all of the expansion of comprehension and quantification,
about: reason rationality logic mathematics physics science
physics, one good theory at all.
Then, relativity of course is just a most usual proposition
of perspective, about the inter-subjective.
"Geometry is motion: worlds turn."