Observations with Mechanical Devices?

[CoolATIGuy]

Preliminarily, I'd like to apologize if I didn't get this posted in the right TA - It's a newbie first-post.

 

To get to my question: I came across a webpage ( http://www.ebtx.com/ntx/ntx10.htm ), which states:

 

Note: Qualitive observables such as "red", "sweet", "left", "anxiety", etc. are not directly detectable by mechanical devices.

 

How is that mechanical devices can't detect those? For starters, "red" is simply a set frequency of light. A mechanical device could take in that proportion, and match it against a set amount to determine the color quality. For sweet, it could dig in the molecular structure to see what it's makeup is, then determine what senses it would stimulate in the mouth....

 

I understand that some things, like the spiritual realm and emotional realms, cannot be measured with physical scientific instruments. But red? That's just a label for quantitive amount, e.g. photon wave frequency...

 

 

Any thoughts? Or maybe clarification on the author's (intended) words?

 

 

CoolATIGuy

[coquina]

Doesn't a lie detector work by measuring anxiety? (As revealed by changes in persperation, respiration, heart rate, etc.)

[Dave]

Doesn't a lie detector work by measuring anxiety? (As revealed by changes in persperation, respiration, heart rate, etc.)

 

Well, it measures those changes, but it can't measure anxiety directly - people can be anxious as hell and still not exhibit those signs (i.e. intelligence spooks, special ops, etc).

[LucidDreamer]

I think red is probably a bad example, as are sweet and left. Anxiety is a good example of a qualitative observable. If it was your job to examine a monkey after you gave him a certain drug to determine side effects then there would be certain things that you could measure and get a specific number and other things that you could not. You could analyzed a sample of his blood and determine an exact number for the amount sodium or glucose in his blood, but you could not put an exact number on other things you might observe. If the monkey seemed especially anxious you would mention how anxious, but there is no exact number for it. Another person might say he was about a 3 out of 5 and you might say he was a 5 out of 5. Qualitative observables don't have exact numbers and require a certain amount of judgement. Another example of a qualitative observable would be happiness or unpleasantness.

 

When the author used red and sweat he was probably talking about an experiment where the scientist would just observe with his own eyes to determine if something was red or if it was sweating. In this case they would be qualitative because he didn't hook up the sample to any machines.

[CoolATIGuy]

Doesn't a lie detector work by measuring anxiety? (As revealed by changes in persperation, respiration, heart rate, etc.)

 

Good point, but I agree with Dave...that is measuring "changes in persperation, respiration, heart rate, etc.", not anxiety.

 

 

When the author used red and sweat he was probably talking about an experiment where the scientist would just observe with his own eyes to determine if something was red or if it was sweating. In this case they would be qualitative because he didn't hook up the sample to any machines.

 

Hmm...possibly. But the author did say, "not directly detectable by mechanical devices."

 

I understand about qualitative observables being relative to an individuals perception in spacetime and their own views & biases. Thanks

 

 

CoolATIGuy

[swansont]

When the author used red and sweat he was probably talking about an experiment where the scientist would just observe with his own eyes to determine if something was red or if it was sweating. In this case they would be qualitative because he didn't hook up the sample to any machines.

 

That was "sweet," not "sweat." The scientist isn't a mechanical device, anyway.

 

Anyway - sometimes things are red because the photons have a certain wavelength, but sometimes it's due to human perception. There are relatively few instances where light is monochromatic, or nearly so. And there are colors that aren't due to a particular wavelength - silver isn't a color of the spectrum; neither is brown. What one perceives as red depends on ambient lighting and surrounding color, and may vary from person to person.

 

And, as a nit, electro-optics aren't technically mechanical means, so hooking up a spectrum analyzer doesn't work anyway.