h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

There have been many paradoxes discussed relating to this definition of perfection. I would like to try to clarify these by making an analogy to the Heisenberg uncertainty relation which covers pairs of observables in physics.

As a example a minimum uncertainty can be calculated for the position and momentum of a particle, the physical implication of this being that the more accurately you know the position of a particle the less you know about its momentum i.e. if you know exactly where it is, you haven't a clue about its momentum and if you know exactly what its momentum is, then you haven't a clue where it is.

I believe the same to apply to perfection and description so that the the more you know about what something is the less you know about its degree of perfection and the more you know about how perfect something is, then the less you know about what it is.

To take this to the extreme of perfection, the only things in this universe that are perfect are the things we haven't a clue about what they are and as soon as we learn a little about them, they cease to be perfect.

Science is destroying perfection and must be stopped!

Oops. That sounds like fairly perfect logic there. That means that your theory now doesn't exist, since it just became perfect!

My theory for me was perfect until I thought of it and for you until you read it - see how much we lose as a result of knowledge.

Science must not be stopped. It's part of our human nature to explore and experiment. Science is not killing perfection. It's showing how perfect our reality really is.

Thankyou....I knew there was some scientific principle behind my driving experience....so if I know the momentum of approaching cars, I cannot know their speed, and vice-versa...yup, that would explain my hit rate!

Not quite. If you know the momentum of a car, you don't know where it is! And if you know where it is, then you don't
know its momentum and since momentum is the product of the mass and the velocity then either you don't know its
speed or you don't know its mass (or you don't know either). It would still account for your hit rate!

Xanthus - you say "the only things in this universe that are perfect are the things we haven't a clue about what they are"
That must be the pull of mysteries, and of beautiful sunsets (we may know what they are, and how, but not why). The most beautiful things are those without understanding or sometimes purpose (which is why pure maths is more fun than science... sorry...)
I love this theory - thankyou.

Continue to exist as a degree of perfection...

Given these extremely convincing theories, I have come to the conclusion that my sex appeal, dress sense and social life all reached perfection long ago. You don't know how much better that makes me feel.

Also, with regards to the Heisenberg uncertainty relation, I think there is a related law that states that the more you know about one aspect of an object, the less you want to know about the rest of it. Sadly, however, I think this particular law only applies in the field of human biology.

Smaug - please let me know when you intend some of that imperfect driving there. Then I'll stay home that day.

Spiny (or may I call you Norman?) I'm afraid your only hope is to be saved by geography or probability! I drive most days...people most at risk live in the Midlands...but even I can't hit them all!

I'll take the Geography option. You'd have to be driving something 300 miles wide to hit me here in Edinburgh. Obviously a vehicle of that magnitude being driven imperfectly would be noticed by those who watch from the skies to monitor the state of perfection on the planet, and you would have to be boiled off into space to protect those of us striving in our own quiet ways to achieve perfection in pedestrianism. Or they might just boil off your driving licence. And you can call me Spiny.

Exactly. I believe that mysteries pulls us becuase they are simply there, but as we come closer to a full understanding of something, it seems to become more normal, and loses it's 'glowing' perfection. I think we will all go crazy if we discover everything(not very likely).

It would appear that many things in life achieve perfection.
One half of pairs of socks, the distal end of my manicured nails, The money in my purse to name but a few.
Another observation is that whilst women seem to aspire to perfection in their hair (if advertisers are to be believed) it seems that men are more likely to achieve tonsorial perfection.
Is there principle to cover a reverse to this in that things cease to be perfect and reapear. This certainly seems to occur with hair in my shower drain, everyone denies all knowledge of it so i must be imperfection.

So, by reading a perfect theory, we take away its perfection? Why drag Schroedinger in here so quickly?

Actually, if Smaug's car demonstrates wavicle-like properties, then the slower it goes, the more likely it is to end up somewhere else altogether (this is the principle behind the Josephson junction). Now, if he's driving in the Midlands, and especially on the M6, he's likely to be going very very slowly indeed - I'd watch out up there!

Does anyone else find the idea of a deterministic subject such as science providing a principle of uncertainty ironic? I always have and wonder if anyone else see's this; whenever I mention it to fellow scientist they think I'm taking the micky.

Perhaps it's no more ironic than when religions claim that God is omnipotent and omniscient, yet he has given us free will...

Wasn't Schroedinger the guy that the RSPCA took to court to ban him from keeping cats? If I remember correctly, the judge threw the action out because there was too much uncertainty.