Definitions

[Sovereign]

I was wondering what the people on this forum define the following words as:

 

exist -

object -

space -

universe -

[Riogho]

Exist - to be comprised of information

 

Object - something that exists that is not biological

 

space - a medium through which objects move

 

universe - An entire system

[YT2095]

I`m not sure I`d exclude bio systems from being an object, I think an "Object" is something that can be focused on, like objective.

[mooeypoo]

I find that the merriam-webster dictionary definition work quite well:

 

Exit: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/exist

1

a: to have real being whether material or spiritual <did unicorns exist> <the largest galaxy known to exist>

b: to have being in a specified place or with respect to understood limitations or conditions <strange ideas existed in his mind>

2: to continue to be <racism still exists in society>

3

a: to have life or the functions of vitality <we cannot exist without oxygen>

b: to live at an inferior level or under adverse circumstances <the hungry existing from day to day>

 

Object depends on your context (and whether it's a noun, verb or adjective). Again here Merriam Webster dictionary, imho, does a pretty good job http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Object

 

Space depends on the context. I tried to see which definition I identify with most, but truth is - it depends entirely on when and how I use that word. You need to be more specific, Sovereign.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/space%5B1%5D

 

In general dictionary is a good place to go when thinking of definitions, but in this case I think you need to be a whole lot more specific as to the context you're referring to with those words, otherwise whatever we say is .. well, irrelevant.

[ajb]

I was wondering what the people on this forum define the following words as:

 

exist -

object -

space -

universe -

 

Some of these have very specific meaning in different braches of science.

 

[math]\exists[/math] in mathematics is very different to "exists" as used in physics. In maths it means you can find (in principle) an element of a class or category such that some condition/requirment holds. In physics, exist is much more subtle than that, and honistly I am not sure what the consensus on that is. The only "real" things are what you can measure.

 

"object" in mathematics are elements of a category or just a class.

 

"space" usually means topological space, that is a set with a topology. A vector space is a topoloical space which is closed under addition. In modern mathematics one can mean something a bit more wider than this, such as in noncommutative geometry. In physics, you think of space as the "arena of dynamics". However, when doing any calculation you are back to the idea of a topological space.

 

"universe" usually means either the observable universe. That is everything we can see.

[Sovereign]

Exist - to be comprised of information

 

Object - something that exists that is not biological

 

space - a medium through which objects move

 

universe - An entire system

 

Perhaps I should have specified that I was looking for what you guys think the scientific definitions of these words are. By scientific definitions I mean ones that are non-contradictory and can be used consistently.

 

For me:

Exist: physical presence

Object: that which has shape

Space: that which lacks shape

Universe: all the objects that exist

[mooeypoo]

I don't think any of us should "think" what the definitions are in science, as they are quite successfully defined in a dictionary.

 

Since they're philosophical in nature, any *individual* probably puts his/her own interpretation on top of the official one, but "SCIENCE" (as a general term) doesn't use opinions for definitions.

That's why we have the convention of a dictionary.

[Sovereign]

I don't think any of us should "think" what the definitions are in science, as they are quite successfully defined in a dictionary.

 

Since they're philosophical in nature, any *individual* probably puts his/her own interpretation on top of the official one, but "SCIENCE" (as a general term) doesn't use opinions for definitions.

That's why we have the convention of a dictionary.

 

Hey that raises a good question, is there a science dictionary?

[mooeypoo]

I think "science" is a too broad of a term. Scientists need to communicate with one another, and they use conventions of language to do that.

 

Regular dictionary defines language conventions. Regular dictionary is quite enough for communication.

[D H]

I think "science" is a too broad of a term. Scientists need to communicate with one another, and they use conventions of language to do that.

 

Regular dictionary defines language conventions. Regular dictionary is quite enough for communication.

There are scientific dictionaries, mooey. This one specializes in chemical and environmental terminology. This one specializes in biological and paleontological terminology. This one is a metadictionary of links to several jargony dictionaries. There are even jargon to jerga translators (and probably jargon to жаргон translators, as well). For example, this one is a bilingual English-Spanish dictionary that specializes in dental terminology.

 

And this one defines physics jargon. It of course leaves common words like exist to the common dictionaries.

Edited January 3, 2009 by Klaynos
Fixed your last link

[mooeypoo]

But aren't they specializing in Scientific-Jargon only? Things like "exist", that are a general-english word (quite philosophical) -- does the scientific community go with specific definition for that, too

 

I thought the specialized dictionary are for the specialized jargon only.

 

Well, good to know

 

Okay sorry I misread -- as I suspected, these "specialized" dictionaries are meant for specific scientific *jargon* and not general philosophical words like "Exist" or such. Those are governed, as D H confirmed, by general dictionaries.

 

General dictionaries are for language conventions. People need to know what other people mean when they say something.

 

Specialized dictionaries are for specialized language conventions. Doctors need to know what other doctors mean when they say something.

 

thanks D H

 

~moo

Edited January 3, 2009 by mooeypoo
okay I misread you, re-editing

[iNow]

All this talk about dictionaries my not be advancing the OPs understanding... In science, the terms are defined in the literature itself... when studies are published. The authors introduce terms, share the specific definition they are going to use, and sometimes those terms get picked up by others in the field. The issue is in the precision, and in how it's supported, not what any dictionary says.

[mooeypoo]

But these specific words are more philosophical than technical, and they are subjected (therefore) to the author's PERSONAL view as well. They're very much subjective a lot of the time.

 

I've seen a few publications, for that reason, that have a "definition" written out for words like these, to tell the reader what the specific publication means when it relates to "existence" for example.

 

Those aren't usual words.. and science has a bit of a problem with vague terms as it is.