NS, I need help on a project. +K for good ideas!

M

mynamegus

Member
It would be possible to describe everything scientifically, but it would make no sense; it would be without meaning, as if you described a Beethoven symphony as a variation of wave pressure. –Albert Einstein

Q: To what extent do you agree with Einstein?

this is the question my english teacher posed to us today, throw out ideas. im not asking for an essay from you guys, just throw out some thoughts i can use in my essay.
 
Physics. Physics is everything. Write an essay that explains walking to class in terms of physics and everything that it entails.
 
About three things I was absolutely positive: First, Edward was a vampire. Second, there was a part of him–and I didn’t know how dominant that part might be–that thirsted for my blood. And third, I was unconditionally and irrevocably in love with him.= Instant A+

That's my idea.
 
its only gay if the balls touch or you look him in the eyes. just make sure you say "no homo" and everything else is fair game.
 
yes i agree with him, some things are better left just appreciated how are minds perceive them initially. We shouldn't waste so much time dissecting the inner details of something and instead should just chill and enjoy it while we can.
 
I would take a different approach to this essay. I would say that if you are describing an instance, such as piece of music, you must direct to you attention to your audience. It is very possible, as Einstein said, to describe a piece of music in terms of sound and waves, but it doesn't serve justice to the quality of music or the time put into composing. It would only make sense to describe the piece using terms relating to the music world that I know not much about.

Overall, I think that the subject of this essay is kinda lame even though the teacher wants you to think outside the box, still a stupid subject matter none the less.
 
Word, this, but it depends on how you look at it. You could argue it two different ways:

If you agree with Einstein: There are "emergent properties" (google it) for everything. You could describe a symphony in terms of sound waves, but then to all except the creator/translator it would seem no different than the sound produced by a bunch of babies banging on shit. There's something to be said for the essence, life, and/or soul of the music.

If you disagree with Einstein: Einstein's statement depends on the fact that most humans, Einstein included, currently cannot process the significance of a symphony described as mathematical sound waves. This is not a problem of the description; it is a problem of the communication medium. If you agree with Einstein then you are saying that humans are limited to a certain type of communication. If you disagree, then you are opening the floor to the possibility of the evolution of communication. Think about it: one day, maybe all of humanity will understand and be able to appreciate the significance and differences in mathematical sound waves. It sounds far fetched now, but is it impossible?

This disagreeing argument is more one of semantics, but hey, English teachers love that shit, that's what critical reading's all about. Good luck!
 
haha quality post right thur.

But definitely go off of this. Not only can you describe the symphony to a directed audience, but how does that compare to humans in general. As if to say it is human nature to immediately pick out the beauty in a song judging on what is popular versus digging deep and recognizing the different scientific components that make up music.

 
Physics cannot be used to describe/measure emotion, which is what music is made to evoke. The feeling you get from listening to a great classical composition can never be explained by formulas and equations.
 
Again, that is assuming a fixed communication medium. It is not impossible to imagine an audience ooohing, ahhhing, sighing, and groaning - just like they would in response to a symphony - upon viewing the equations to the equivalent wave patterns on a projector. Music is a means of communication, and communication evolves. Therefore you cannot say that the feeling evoked by music can never be replicated by math or physics, because that feeling is the product of a communication.
 
this just about sums it up

buuuuuut.....

you'll probably get a better grade if you write something different...play devil's advocate and disagree with the almighty genius. as long as the paper is clear, well written, and you back up your arguments with something substantive, you should do fine.
 
i guess emotions and satisfaction and stuff can technically be scientifically explained but no matter how well you explain it scientifically, there's really no way to capture what it actually is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top