Zitate von Arthur Stanley Eddington
Arthur Stanley Eddington
Geburtstag: 28. Dezember 1882
Todesdatum: 22. November 1944
Andere Namen:Sir Arthur Eddington,Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington
Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington war ein britischer Astrophysiker. Er war der Erste, dem die Modellierung des inneren Aufbaus von Sternen gelang. Weitere Schwerpunkte seiner Forschungen waren Dynamik der Sternbewegungen, astronomische Anwendungen der Relativitätstheorie und die Philosophie der Naturwissenschaften.
Ähnliche Autoren
Harald Lesch6
deutscher Astrophysiker, Fernsehmoderator und Professor
Aneurin Bevan1
britischer Politiker
Sefton Delmer3
englischer Journalist
Sting17
englischer Musiker
Mick Jagger1
britischer Musiker, Sänger der Rolling Stones
Charlotte Roche9
britische Fernsehmoderatorin, Schauspielerin, Autorin in ...
Jane Austen9
britische Schriftstellerin
Edmund Burke8
Schriftsteller, Staatsphilosoph und Politiker
Anthony Hopkins1
britisch-amerikanischer Schauspieler
Cat Stevens3
britischer MusikerZitate Arthur Stanley Eddington
„Die Mathematik ist nicht da, solange wir sie nicht da hinstellen.“
— Arthur Stanley Eddington
Zitiert von Robert B. Laughlin: Abschied von der Weltformel, Deutsch von Helmut Reuter, 10. Kap. "Das Gewebe der Raumzeit", S. 179, Piper Verlag, 2007, ISBN 978-3492047180
„Das Universum ist nicht nur seltsamer, als wir es uns vorstellen, es ist seltsamer, als wir es uns vorstellen können.“
— Arthur Stanley Eddington
Zitiert von Robert B. Laughlin: Abschied von der Weltformel, Deutsch von Helmut Reuter, Widmungsblatt für Laughlings Frau Anita, S. 5, Piper Verlag, 2007, ISBN 978-3492047180
„If our so-called facts are changing shadows, they are shadows cast by the light of constant truth.“
— Arthur Stanley Eddington
Context: If our so-called facts are changing shadows, they are shadows cast by the light of constant truth. So too in religion we are repelled by that confident theological doctrine... but we need not turn aside from the measure of light that comes into our experience showing us a Way through the unseen world.<!--IX, p.91
„However closely we may associate thought with the physical machinery of the brain, the connection is dropped as irrelevant as soon as we consider the fundamental property of thought—that it may be correct or incorrect. ...that involves recognising a domain of the other type of law—laws which ought to be kept, but may be broken.“
— Arthur Stanley Eddington
Context: However closely we may associate thought with the physical machinery of the brain, the connection is dropped as irrelevant as soon as we consider the fundamental property of thought—that it may be correct or incorrect.... that involves recognising a domain of the other type of law—laws which ought to be kept, but may be broken.<!--V, p.57-58
„Our story of evolution ended with a stirring in the brain-organ of the latest of Nature's experiments“
— Arthur Stanley Eddington
Context: Our story of evolution ended with a stirring in the brain-organ of the latest of Nature's experiments; but that stirring of consciousness transmutes the whole story and gives meaning to its symbolism. Symbolically it is the end, but looking behind the symbolism it is the beginning.<!--III, p.38
„The problem of experiences is not limited to the interpretation of sense-impressions.“
— Arthur Stanley Eddington
Context: The problem of experiences is not limited to the interpretation of sense-impressions.<!--IV, p.40
„You will understand the true spirit neither of science nor of religion unless seeking is placed in the forefront.“
— Arthur Stanley Eddington
Context: You will understand the true spirit neither of science nor of religion unless seeking is placed in the forefront.<!--IX, p.88
„The man in the street is always making this demand for concrete explanation of the things referred to in science; but of necessity he must be disappointed.“
— Arthur Stanley Eddington
Context: Science aims at constructing a world which shall be symbolic of the world of commonplace experience. It is not at all necessary that every individual symbol that is used should represent something in common experience or even something explicable in terms of common experience. The man in the street is always making this demand for concrete explanation of the things referred to in science; but of necessity he must be disappointed. It is like our experience in learning to read. That which is written in a book is symbolic of a story in real life. The whole intention of the book is that ultimately a reader will identify some symbol, say BREAD, with one of the conceptions of familiar life. But it is mischievous to attempt such identifications prematurely, before the letters are strung into words and the words into sentences. The symbol A is not the counterpart of anything in familiar life.
Introduction http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Eddington_Gifford.html
„It is to this background that our own personality and consciousness belong, and those spiritual aspects of our nature not to be described by any symbolism... to which mathematical physics has hitherto restricted itself.“
— Arthur Stanley Eddington
Context: It remains a real world if there is a background to the symbols—an unknown quantity which the mathematical symbol x stands for. We think we are not wholly cut off from this background. It is to this background that our own personality and consciousness belong, and those spiritual aspects of our nature not to be described by any symbolism... to which mathematical physics has hitherto restricted itself.<!--III, p.37-38
„To understand the phenomena of the physical world it is necessary to know the equations which the symbols obey but not the nature of that which is being symbolised.“
— Arthur Stanley Eddington
Context: If to-day you ask a physicist what he has finally made out the æther or the electron to be, the answer will not be a description in terms of billiard balls or fly-wheels or anything concrete; he will point instead to a number of symbols and a set of mathematical equations which they satisfy. What do the symbols stand for? The mysterious reply is given that physics is indifferent to that; it has no means of probing beneath the symbolism. To understand the phenomena of the physical world it is necessary to know the equations which the symbols obey but not the nature of that which is being symbolised.... this newer outlook has modified the challenge from the material to the spiritual world.<!--III, p.30
„Never mind what two tons refers to. What is it?“
— Arthur Stanley Eddington
Context: Never mind what two tons refers to. What is it? How has it entered in so definite a way into our exprerience? Two tons is the reading of the pointer when the elephant was placed on a weighing machine. Let us pass on. … And so we see that the poetry fades out of the problem, and by the time the serious application of exact science begins we are left only with pointer readings.
Ch. 7 Pointer Readings <!-- p. 252 -->
„If God is as real as the shadow of the Great War on Armistice Day, need we seek further reason for making a place for God in our thoughts and lives?“
— Arthur Stanley Eddington
Context: If God is as real as the shadow of the Great War on Armistice Day, need we seek further reason for making a place for God in our thoughts and lives? We shall not be concerned if the scientific explorer reports that he is perfectly satisfied that he has got to the bottom of things without having come across either.<!--VI, p.67
„We have found a strange foot-print on the shores of the unknown.“
— Arthur Stanley Eddington
Context: We have found a strange foot-print on the shores of the unknown. We have devised profound theories, one after another, to account for its origins. At last, we have succeeded in reconstructing the creature that made the footprint. And lo! It is our own.<!--p.201
„We are no longer tempted to condemn the spiritual aspects of our nature as illusory because of their lack of concreteness.“
— Arthur Stanley Eddington
Context: We are no longer tempted to condemn the spiritual aspects of our nature as illusory because of their lack of concreteness.<!--III, p.33
„Wherever a way opens we are impelled to seek by the only methods that can be devised for that particular opening,“
— Arthur Stanley Eddington
Context: Physical science comes nearest to that complete system of exact knowledge which all sciences have before them as an ideal. Some fall far short of it. The physicist who inveighs against the lack of coherence and the indefiniteness of theological theories, will probably speak not much less harshly of the theories of biology and psychology. They also fail to come up to his standard of methodology. On the other side of him stands an even superior being—the pure mathematician—who has no high opinion of the methods of deduction used in physics, and does not hide his disapproval of the laxity of what is accepted as proof in physical science. And yet somehow knowledge grows in all these branches. Wherever a way opens we are impelled to seek by the only methods that can be devised for that particular opening, not over-rating the security of our finding, but conscious that in this activity of mind we are obeying the light that is in our nature.<!--VII, p.77-78
