Total Pageviews

Showing posts with label fundmental. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fundmental. Show all posts

POEM 3: Spiral of the Uncertain: Embracing the Unseen

Spiral of the Uncertain: Embracing the Unseen

- John Paul 


I. Invocation - Not Cold Mathematics

Not from cold mathematics alone
did the universe loosen into flame
not because mathematics is false,
but because they are lenses, not the same.
a disciplined way of seeing,
not the whole of what is seen.

Equations trace the paths that relate,
yet never exhaust the pulse of the whole;
not from drifting where formulas wait,
nor from frozen calculus void of soul.

Not from blind equation drifting without witness,
nor from frozen calculus turning in vacancy,
but from a depth that thinks
and endures its own thinking;
a source vast enough
to enter fracture,
to enter wound,
so the fragile might learn to stand.

A Logos that breathes through fire and desire,
reason that tenderly loves, not tires.

II. Descent - Layered Fires

We walk through layered fires,
circles of longing, circles of desire,
descending through attachments
we once called love,
we once admired.

Betrayal does not strike like thunder;
it comes as a voice we knew,
speaking differently under the sky,
the hand once trusted slipping through,
the sweetness once shared turning askew.

We are squares in Flatland
arguing about dimensions
we cannot see,
laughing at spheres
until the sky opens
and depth is glimpsed.

Testis interior, Sākṣī;
the silent sky within,
watching anger like shifting weather,
watching ambition rise and fall
like galaxies spinning together.

The invisible confesses itself
through consequence,
revealing the currents
beneath our small certainties.

III. Matter Becoming 

On a silica plate so smooth
it seems almost to deny friction,
a migrating trace separates and resolves.
A single traveling stain confirms completion.

No eye has witnessed
the hidden exchange of electrons,
yet the faint path declares
that bonds have broken,
that new unions hold.

In flasks where carbon rehearses its grammar,
rings open, chains extend,
nucleophiles seek their moment,
electrophiles yield,
intermediates flicker and vanish;
brief, unstable, necessary.

Mechanism is choreography:
arrows drawn to honor
motions we infer but cannot behold.
Some reactions require heat,
some require patience,
some must be quenched
before they shatter the vessel.

Change is not measurement;
it is metamorphosis,
not reduction,
but re-patterning,
true novelty not in smallness
but in transformed response,
a dance of matter,
a pulse of form,
a whisper of becoming,
made manifest.

IV. Fields and Thresholds 

Beyond the flask, the scale expands.
Electrons drift through ordered lattices,
no longer bound to single addresses,
described not as points alone
but as spread, as shimmer, as possibility;
patterns of probability
threaded through structure.

Energy gathers into bands;
permitted regions of motion,
separated by silent intervals
where no state may rest.
When the gap narrows, flow awakens.
When wide, resistance prevails.

Statistical mechanics listens
not to one particle
but to multitudes.
Temperature becomes collective restlessness.
Entropy counts unseen arrangements.

Equilibrium is not stillness;
it is dynamic balance,
a swing, a drift,
a whisper between order and undoing.
Gradual pressure gathers unseen,
until fracture declares itself.

Critical points arrive suddenly,
after seasons of accumulation.
The world is not linear:
a slight perturbation ripples, amplifies,
feedback loops tighten, spiral, coil.
Chaos births pattern;
systems fold into strange attractors.
Predictability survives
only as pattern within unpredictability,
a lattice of possibility
waving across the infinite.

V. The Brain - Repetition and Release

And the brain;
pliant architect of itself;
rewires along repeated pathways.

Fear rehearsed becomes corridor.
Courage practiced becomes bridge.

The depth that thinks
now thinking through neuron,
entering fracture again;
this time in us.

Practice inscribes structure
in living tissue.

Rest, too, obeys law.
In darkness, the mind resets its circuits.
Memory settles into deeper strata.
Without surrender to stillness,
No lasting creation endures.

Act fully and unclench.

VI. Ecologies - Forest and Body

Among trees,
the air is not empty.

Invisible compounds drift from leaves;
molecules that quiet inflammation,
that tune immune vigilance.

The forest does not preach;
it recalibrates.

Our bodies remember green.
Isolation thins resilience.

Love too is ecological.
It is not possession
but mutual flourishing.

A friend who becomes brother without shared blood.
A woman who becomes sister through loyalty.
Standing beside family in crisis
because belonging is chosen.

Like stable molecules sharing electrons
without losing identity,
love balances bond and freedom.

Where chemistry traces pathways
and physics maps fields of possibility,
we ask a further question:

If matter follows patterned relation,
if mind rewires through repetition,
if systems bend toward equilibrium
through cost and release—

might consciousness itself
also admit alignment?

Not imposed from outside,
not interruption of law,
but coherence so complete
that it appears luminous.

The spiral narrows here;
from cosmos
to carbon
to cortex
to character.

And sometimes,
in history,
that alignment takes flesh.

VII. Sacred Embodiments - Alignment in Flesh

Across history, certain lives
embody this pattern vividly.

The Lamb of Logos
born under threat, carried into exile,
trembling in a garden,
yet aligning human will with deeper purpose;
divine in form, yet human in doubt,
facing uncertainty even in whispered prayers,
learning courage in the shadow of fear.

The Blue Child on Peacock
born in captivity, hidden from violence,
speaking clarity amid a battlefield,
playful, human, yet embodying cosmic consciousness;
confused, questioning, testing the path,
yet teaching us that clarity emerges through trial.

The Rose who resists in the green doom
orphaned early, shaken in solitude,
learning to trust the voice that unsettled and summoned him,
divine presence wrestling with human fear,
uncertain from the first breath,
yet showing that steadfastness grows from struggle.

Even gods, clothed in flesh, know the weight of doubt,
and in their hesitation, their trials, their uncertainty,
they show us the way.

Beneath the rituals, beyond the traditions,
lies this deeper meaning;
that courage, like a river, carves its course through shadow,
that alignment is learned in fracture,
and that fragility is not weakness, but passage to transcendence.

Divinity does not erase humanity;
it flows through it.
Not as domination,
but as coherence under strain,
as light emerging through the cracks of doubt,
as faith born in the laboratory of uncertainty.

VIII. Wound and Refinement

Sin is more than surface stain.
It is rupture in alignment,
distortion in relationship.

For distortion left unattended
repatterns the whole field.
And yet;
what can deform
can also be transformed.

It cannot be wiped away by denial;
it must be treated from within.

As infection spreads through tissue,
so concealed fault reshapes the soul
until courage consents to incision
and mercy becomes medicine.

Carbon under pressure becomes diamond.
Consciousness sheds ignorance
through cycles of refinement.

Life is purposeful becoming.

IX. Love (Second Movement)

For love is more than intimacy.
It is understanding before touch,
recognition before embrace.

To know another’s fracture
and guard it, not use it.

To share strength
without creating dependence.

Closeness without suffocation.
Care without control.

As lattices hold structure
without crushing motion,
When the inner gap narrows,
trust conducts again.
When widened by fear,
resistance prevails.

Affection must balance
bond and freedom.

Innocence is not ignorance.
It is knowing one’s capacity for ruin
and choosing restraint.

Wisdom is self-mastery.

X. The Witness

We think,
and then we examine the thinker.

A lantern turned inward
studies the flame that holds it.

Anger passes like weather.
Ambition swells and thins.
Behind them
a wider sky remains.

Witness within the storm.
Sky behind the weather.

We are small;
yet capable of turning awareness upon itself.

Perhaps the real transformation
is not matter shrinking into strangeness,
but consciousness widening
until fear loosens its claim.

The universe expands.
So can we.

XI. Spiral Conclusion

The universe continues outward;
not cold mathematics alone,
but relation widening.

And you;
storm of elements,
maker of models,
witness of your own becoming;

are not asked for certainty,
but for alignment.

Not sterile arithmetic;
but courage entering fracture.

The depth that thinks
now thinks through you.

And in probability and ash,
in exile and awakening,
in fracture and forgiveness,
a deeper order breathes;
unfinished,
yet quietly healing
toward wholeness.



As the spiral of the poem draws to a close, the reader has traversed layers of thought, matter, and feeling through fracture, alignment, and awakening. From the patterns of the cosmos to the inner workings of the mind, and from the bonds of love to the courage of the human spirit, a path has been traced: one that does not seek certainty, but embraces possibility.

It is here, at this threshold between reflection and experience, that the poem offers its final invitation:

The poem invites the reader to move with uncertainty, rather than against it. Fractures, doubts, and challenges are not obstacles, but openings, opportunities for growth, reflection, and courage. By observing the mind and its patterns, we discover the possibility of transformation. Through patience, practice, and careful attention, alignment can emerge, within ourselves, in our relationships, and in the world around us. Life is not a problem to be solved, but a process to be lived. True strength arises when we engage with the unknown, allowing it to shape, guide, and refine us.

A Realist view of logic and physics

 Realism: A Journey through Logic and Physics

“I know three things will never be believed - the true, the probable, and the logical.”

- John Steinbeck 

 



In a time scale of the sun's age we we can confidently say that we have not made the world, compared with the changes achieved by animals and plants. Yet we have created a new kind of artifact which promises in time to work changes in our corner of the world as great as those worked by our predecessors, the oxygen-producing plants or the islanding building corals. These new products, which are decidedly of our own making, are our myths, our ideas, especially our scientific theories: theories about the world we live in. 

I suggest that we may look upon these myths, these ideas, and theories as some of the most characteristic products of human activity ( as said by Karl Popper).  They are organs evolving outside our skins per se these are exosomatic artifacts. 

Thus we may count among these characteristics products especially what is call " human knowledge" where we take the word 'knowledge' in the objective or impersonal sense, in which it may be contained in a book, stored in a library, or in the internet. 

" Knowledge produced by a person is analogous to honey produced by bees". Bees produce, store, and consume honey, but typically, a bee does not just eat the honey it has produced. Drones, which don't make any honey, also consume it, and bees can lose their stored honey to bears or beekeepers. Interestingly, worker bees need to consume honey, often made by other bees to maintain their ability to produce honey.

This concept largely applies, with minor differences, to oxygen-producing plants and theory-producing humans. Like bees with honey, we are both producers and consumers of theories. We must consume others' theories and occasionally our own to continue generating theories. Here, 'to consume' primarily means 'to digest,' similar to bees. However, it extends further: consuming theories involves critiquing, altering, and often dismantling them to make way for better ones. These processes are essential for the advancement of our knowledge.

Humans produce not only scientific theories but also a variety of other ideas, such as religious or poetic myths and friction. What distinguishes a scientific theory from a work of fiction? It's not just that theories might be true while fictional stories are not, though truth and falsehood are relevant. The key difference is that theories and stories are embedded in different critical traditions. They are judged by distinct traditional standards, despite having some commonalities. 

A scientific theory is characterized by its purpose as a solution to a scientific problem. This problem may have emerged from previous critical discussions of tentative theories or may have been discovered by the theory's author within the realm of scientific problems and solutions. However, this is not the whole picture. The scientific tradition, until recently, has been defined by what can be termed scientific realism. This means it was driven by the idea of finding true solutions to its problems that correspond to the facts. This regulative ideal of seeking theories that match facts is what makes the scientific tradition a realist one. It differentiates between the realm of our theories and the realm of facts to which these theories pertain. Furthermore, the natural sciences, with their critical methods of problem-solving, and some social sciences like history and economics, have long represented our best efforts in problem-solving and fact-finding. By fact-finding, I mean discovering statements or theories that correspond to facts. Thus, these sciences generally contain the best statements and theories from the standpoint of truth, providing the best descriptions of the world of facts, or what we call 'reality'.



Emergence from reduction

Physics and chemistry, which deal with physical things and states, are closely related. Chemistry’s inapplicability at extreme temperatures suggests it may be reducible to physics—a significant scientific achievement, fostering unity and understanding. Assuming chemistry is fully reduced to physics, we might hope to similarly reduce biology to physics. However, living organisms differ fundamentally from non-living things, making this reduction more challenging. While progress in understanding the origin of life and creating primitive organisms may occur, true reduction requires more than control over processes. It demands theoretical integration, comprehending the new field through the principles of the old one.

The reduction of chemistry to physics, seemingly progressing well, can be seen as a prime example of a true scientific reduction that meets all the criteria for a robust scientific explanation. A 'good' or 'scientific' reduction is a process through which we gain significant insights: we come to understand and explain the theories of the field being reduced (chemistry in this case) and we also learn about the capabilities of the theories from the reducing field (physics in this instance).

I term "bad reduction" or "ad hoc reduction" as the method of reducing concepts through mere linguistic maneuvers. For instance, physicalism, which proposes the ad hoc existence of physiological states to explain behavior previously explained by mental states (without such ad hoc postulation), is an example. Another example is the linguistic device of claiming to describe a physiological state when stating that one understands the Schrödinger equation. This second type of reduction, or misuse of Ockham's razor, is problematic because it obscures the real issue. As Imre Lakatos vividly describes, it is a "degenerating problem shift" that can hinder either a good reduction or the study of emergence, or both.



Thought process and understanding

Supporting the emergent nature of theories or knowledge in an objective sense. I'll mention a few arguments against the naive and popular view that theories can be reduced to the mental states of those who create or understand them. (We won't discuss whether these mental states can, in turn, be reduced to physical states.) The notion that a theory in its objective or logical sense can be reduced to the mental states of those who hold it is typically framed as the theory simply being a thought. However, this is a fundamental mistake: it fails to distinguish between two meanings of the word 'thought'. Subjectively, 'thought' refers to a mental experience or process. But two mental experiences or processes, while possibly causally related, cannot be logically related. 

For example, if I say that certain ideas of the Buddha align with those of Schopenhauer or contradict those of Nietzsche, I'm not referring to the mental thought processes of these individuals or their interactions. Conversely, if I say Nietzsche was influenced by Schopenhauer's ideas, I mean that Nietzsche's thought processes were causally affected by his reading of Schopenhauer. Therefore, we have two distinct realms: the realm of thought processes and the realm of the products of thought processes. The former may be causally related, while the latter are logically related. The incompatibility of certain theories is a logical fact, independent of whether anyone has recognized or understood this incompatibility. These objective logical relationships define the entities I call theories or knowledge in the objective sense. 

This distinction is evident when considering that the creators of theories often do not fully understand them. For instance, it could be argued that Erwin Schrödinger did not fully understand his own equation until Max Born provided a statistical interpretation; or that Kepler did not fully comprehend his own area law, which he reportedly disliked. Understanding a theory is akin to an infinite task, suggesting that a theory is never completely understood, although some may grasp certain theories very well. 

Understanding a theory is similar to understanding a human personality: we may predict a person's behavior in various situations but cannot fully understand all their possible responses due to the infinite variety of potential situations. Similarly, a full understanding of a theory would require grasping all its logical consequences, which are infinite. Thus, no one, not even its creator, can fully comprehend all the possibilities within a theory, highlighting that theories, in their logical sense, are objective entities that we can study and attempt to understand. It is no more paradoxical to say that theories or ideas are our creations yet not fully understood by us than to say that our children are our creations yet not fully understood by us, or that honey is a product of bees yet not fully understood by any bee.



Realism and physics

In modern physics, subjectivism has become integral in two key areas: Boltzmann's theory of entropy (the arrow of time) and Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, which define a minimum limit on the observer's influence over the observed object. Einstein also introduced subjectivity when he included the observer in various thought experiments aimed at elucidating relativity, but he subsequently removed the observer from this domain over time.

The Heisenberg formula for energy is independent of both wave mechanics and Heisenberg's matrix mechanics. It also does not rely on commutation relations. Surprisingly, it does not stem from the revolutionary quantum mechanics of 1925-1926 but directly derives from Planck's earlier quantum postulate from 1900.

The interpretation proposed here suggests viewing Heisenberg's uncertainty principles as statistical scatter relations rather than indicators of the precision of measurements or limits to our knowledge. In this view, the principles don't speak directly to the precision of measurements but rather to the limits of homogeneity in quantum-physical states, indirectly addressing predictability. 

For instance, the formula Δ𝑝⋅Δ𝑞 ≈ ℎ implies that upon determining the coordinate 𝑥 of a system, such as an electron, the momentum 𝑝 will scatter upon repetition of the experiment. This assertion can be tested by conducting a series of experiments with a fixed shutter opening Δ𝑥, measuring the momentum 𝑝​ in each case. If the measured momenta scatter as predicted, the formula survives the test. Notably, these experiments require measuring 𝑝 with a precision greater than Δ𝑝, as otherwise, speaking of Δ𝑝 ​ as the scatter of 𝑝 ​ wouldn't make sense. Such experiments are routinely conducted in physical laboratories, challenging the interpretation of Heisenberg's indeterminacy principle. While Heisenberg acknowledged the possibility of such measurements, he deemed attaching meaning to them a matter of personal belief or taste, leading to their disregard as meaningless. 

However, they serve a specific purpose: testing the formulae themselves as scatter relations. This perspective argues against accepting Heisenberg's or Bohr's subjectivist interpretation of quantum mechanics, suggesting instead that quantum mechanics is a statistical theory suited to solving statistical problems, such as spectral intensities. As such, there's no philosophical need to defend its non-causal character.

There's no reason to doubt the realism and objectivity of physics. In modern physics, the observer's role remains similar to that in classical physics – primarily testing theories. This process involves evaluating competing and auxiliary theories, highlighting that we are not so much observers as thinkers.




Realism in logic

Logic, in essence, can be seen as the theory of deduction or derivability. It involves transmitting truth from premises to conclusions, as seen in proofs, and transmitting falsity from conclusions back to premises, as seen in disproofs or rebuttals. In critical discussions, logic is frequently used to challenge assertions by demonstrating their falsehood. If a conclusion is shown to be false, and the inference is assumed to be valid, it follows that at least one premise must be false. Thus, criticism becomes a vital methodological tool. Rejecting criticism by dismissing the logic used undermines the effectiveness of critical discussion. Logic serves two main purposes: in demonstrative sciences like mathematics, it's primarily used for proofs, while in empirical sciences, it's predominantly employed for critical analysis to uncover falsity. Although applied mathematics plays a role in empirical sciences, its significance is somewhat questionable in various aspects.

The rationalist view is characterized by its realist perspective on logic. Firstly, it associates logic with the methodology of the natural sciences, which the rationalist view considers to be grounded in realism. Secondly, it emphasizes logical inference as a process of transmitting truth or retransmitting falsity, thus highlighting the importance of truth in logical reasoning.



Theories of Truth

There are three main theories of truth. The oldest, the correspondence theory, posits that truth corresponds to the facts or accurately describes them, as Tarski emphasized. The coherence theory views truth as coherence with existing knowledge, while the pragmatic theory defines truth in terms of its practical utility or usefulness.

The coherence theory encompasses various interpretations, two of which are notable. The first posits truth as coherence with our beliefs, implying that a statement is true if it aligns with our existing beliefs. However, this approach raises concerns about integrating beliefs into logic due to potential logical constraints conflicting with individual beliefs. The second version suggests that an uncertain statement should be deemed true if it aligns with previously accepted statements, fostering a highly conservative approach to knowledge preservation. Contrastingly, the pragmatic utility theory focuses on the utility of theories in natural sciences, particularly physics. It suggests that a physical theory should be accepted as true if it proves pragmatically useful and successful in tests and applications.



Questions and interpretations???

Eliminating verbal or definitional questions, considering them as pseudo-questions. Questions like "What is life?", "What is matter?", "What is mind?", or "What is logic?" are viewed as unfruitful. They advocate discarding the question "What is truth?" for two main reasons. First, they reject essentialism, and second, they advise against discussing the meaning of words, likening it to a game that philosophers are addicted to but which they consider unimportant.





Incorporating the concept of verisimilitude or approximation to truth into logic enhances its realism by enabling discussion of how one theory aligns better with real-world facts than another. From a realist perspective, logic serves as the tool for criticism rather than proof in our quest for true and highly informative theories. Criticism becomes the primary instrument for advancing our knowledge about the factual world, aiming to promote the growth of our understanding by refining and improving upon existing theories.





This article is inspired from the works of Sir Karl Popper, Wolfgang Yourgrau, Allen D Breck




Hope this article inspires you. 

Contact me through my blog or https://www.instagram.com/phy.sci/?hl=en.



- J John Paul

Model of scientific framework

Model of scientific framework

Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of knowledge. 

-Carl Sagan

 



This article is not a technical account. This is an attempt to understand the fundamental sciences (Physical science, chemical science, and biological science) as models of different ideas and concepts. As this is an amateur (lay) approach to these concepts any ideas or thoughts might need to be better formalized.

This is also a continuation of the "Model theory" (click hereclick here) whose main objective is to understand how we think and understand things.

This is divided into four parts. A minuscule introduction to all the parts is provided in this blog. A detailed explanation of each piece will be dealt with at a later time. 

Part - 1:  Physical science

Physical science in short is the study of the fundamental ideas of non-living things. If forms the basis of all other sciences. most of the physical science is based on the mathematical formulation and the physical certainty of things around us. It broadly involves the study of the universe through cosmology, the study of atoms by quantum mechanics, the study of moving bodies by classical mechanics, the study of an ensemble of particles by statistical mechanics, the study of energy through thermodynamics, the study of subatomic particles by electrodynamics and so on. Almost everything in science can be understood through the basis and approaches of physical science. 



Part - 2: Chemical science

Chemical science is the study of materials and their properties thus it gives a good understanding of the material universe. It uses the concepts of physical science to understand how materials combine, how they exist, and how they are formed and modified. In a very broad view, they have three different branches; Organic chemistry - deals with the study of compounds that are mostly made up of carbon and hydrogen as a base otherwise an organic compound. ; Physical chemistry - deals with the study of chemical systems with the help of the concepts of physics (A specific study of chemical systems using physics). ; Inorganic chemistry - deals with the study of all other

chemical species that don't have a carbon-hydrogen compound.  Thus chemical science deals with the composition of substances and their properties and reactions.



Part - 3:  Biological science

Biological science is a bit complex field to understand. it's like a living being studying a living being. In a formal way, it is the study of life. It has several unifying themes that tie it together as a single, it is a coherent field. It is a complex blend of the above two parts and other significant small parts. Medicine is one of the most important applications of biological science. Chemically it is the atoms, molecules, water, organic compounds, and macromolecules; signaling, Inheritance, development, and self-sustaining. We can always apply any science we discover to study life. It is difficult to give a short technical overview of biological science. In a codified manner, it is the study of us. 



Part 4: Model of  system

The above parts can be combined and put under the same roof which is generally call them as natural science which is the study of everything around us. As scientifically sound, we are able to combine them all into a single system and understand things in a related way.  Mostly this model of system can be a base for engineering like mechanical, civil, biotechnology, chemical, electrical, electronics, etc. This model of system is not a constant

system it is a feedback system so as far as we know the physical world exists because the system flows in and out of itself. The way of thinking and understanding it is a task that should be provided with time, thought, and information from which we can have an emergence. 




This is inspired by the work of  Barbara Minto (Pyramid Principle), N. Seshagiri, Richard Feynman, Henri Bergson (Matter and Memory), and others. 

This is an open problem to think about and analyze. My views and thoughts will be shared at a later time after getting some experience. 


HOPE YOU LEARNT A NEW THING AND CHANGE THE WAY OF LOOKING AROUND YOU.

If you have any questions regarding this you are free to express them in the comments or you can chat with me on my Instagram page to discuss this.  https://www.instagram.com/phy.sci/?hl=en.

Vibration - Eternal motion

 Vibration - Eternal motion

Everything in life is vibration 
- Albert Einstain
https://gifer.com/en/gifs/devils-tuning-fork

Our human senses are not powerful as we think. We miss many events that happen in nature. Even though we have the most evolved conscious but our sensory perception is not on par with other living organisms. 

The sense of vibration can be seen from different viewpoints. It can be viewed as a physical event and modeled it using the laws of physics and mathematics, It can be viewed as a philosophical thought of the cycle of life and even it can be viewed in spirituality as a connection to the unknown creator.

The essence of vibration can be best understood using the modern scientific formulation. This article will be a bird's eye view of vibration in our life and I will explain why I call vibration the "eternal motion".

This article will give a scientific explanation. This explanation may not be scientifically accurate but will provide a good intuition of the concept.


TO AND FRO MOTION

To and fro, back and forth or here and there all these verbal expressions mean the same thing. In a very general view, this expression indicates the movement of someone or something forward or backward followed by a return to the same position. This in general indicates many ideas such as emotional state, relationship, or a physical thing. We are only interested in the physical aspect of to and fro motion. 

As a human, we all would have seen the flapping of wings by a bird while flying this is a classical example of to and fro motion. This type of motion can be best understood by observing the wings of a bird or an insect. Now if you see the following picture you may get a visual idea of this here and there motion, or back and forth motion. 



An Introduction to Flapping Wing Aerodynamics (CHAPTER-1)
Wei Shyy, Hikaru Aono, Chang-kwon Kang, Hao Liu Cambridge University Press

From the above image, The motion of the bird is from right to left. The positions of wings at the 2nd and 4th stages are the equilibrium position or the position which is aligned to the body and this is the position of cruising flight. Now if we watch the position of the wings on stage 1 it is upward and on stage 3 it is downward. Now, this up and down motion from the equilibrium position is the to and fro motion of the bird's wings. (The curve line will be explained in the following section).

There are many such examples of this type of motion in our daily life, blinking of eyes, beating of heart, breathing, moving branches in the air, the motion of a swing, movement of clock hands, moving pistol in an automobile engine, and more. So in general this type of motion expression indicates the movement of someone or something forward or backward followed by a return to the same position.
 


REPETITIVE PERIODIC MOTION

Repeat - An action that is performed more than once (like breathing).

Periodic - An event occurring at intervals of time (like the beating of the heart).

Motion - Some movement through time which is defined using Newton's second law. 

Once we have an idea about to and fro motion the next step is to understand the essence of "repetitive periodic motion". As each word is defined it will be clear for you. A repetitive periodic motion is a motion that occurs more than one time in specific intervals of time. The best example of this is our heart. The heart has some movement as a whole so it is exhibiting repetitive periodic motion. I.e. in general a human heartbeat 60 to 100 times in a minute (This is given in a range because the heartbeat depends on many factors) and this process can be modeled using Newton's laws of motion.

Now we are clear about to and fro motion, time interval, and repetitive periodic motion (If you are not able to understand this contact me through the link provided at the end or ask your doubt in the comment).


OSCILLATION AND VIBRATION - A scientific approach to understanding repetitive periodic to and fro motion

When even we describe a thing we describe it through a physical quantity or a property, for example, we describe the movement of a car using speed or velocity, and we describe the dimensions of an object using size. In a similar way, repetitive periodic to and fro motion can be described using frequency. 

FREQUENCY -  Frequency is the number of occurrences of a repeating event per unit of time. For example, a high E string in a guitar goes up and down from the rest position 330 times in a second therefore the frequency of vibration of the high E guitar string is 330 Hz. Normally 1 Hz is the occurrence of one event in one second. 

So, frequency is an important property to understand vibration. There are many consequences of frequency in a physical understanding like wavelength and wave period. wave number etc. When we deal with a repetitive periodic motion we always express the motion in terms of waves. 

WAVES - Waves are the disturbance caused by repetitive periodic motion. The disturbance travel in a medium usually air, water, metal, etc. Even our human ear is working due to the disturbance caused by various events. Broadly speaking waves are the physical and mathematical consequence of vibrations and oscillations. If you see the previous image representing the flapping of wings of a bird, the bottom of the image is a curved line. This is not a random curve, mathematically it is a sine wave that is obtained from the rotating vectors. So a flapping of a bird's wing along with time represents a wave. At first, I actually felt the hoe an up-down motion (almost straight) can form a curve but it can. Try it your self take a long piece of paper and move the paper in a direction with constant velocity, on the other hand, use a pen and move your hands up and down you can see a similar pattern of flapping of a bird's wing. Physically it forms a sine curve but mathematically we can obtain many things from it like the frequency or the system which is causing it, wavelength, wavenumber, etc (this will be dealt with in detail in another blog).

The idea that we should understand here is that whenever there is a vibration, as a consequence of that vibration waves are formed and the nature of vibration can be understood by studying the waves.

OSCILLATIONS - "Oscillation is the repetitive or periodic variation, typically in time, of some measure about a central value often a point of equilibrium or between two or more different states". If someone search in Wikipedia this is the answer they get. Getting answers is not important but understanding them is important. 

Now if you take the flapping of wings the wings go up as much as they can and the wings move down as much as they can so, they are moving between two different states keeping the 2nd and 4th stage as equilibrium position so the wings of a bird are oscillating around a mean point. 

There is another example of oscillation in a non-physical way a child's mind oscillates between choosing a chocolate and ice cream. So anything that changes its state between two states can be considered oscillations.

The following show a spring and mass system (an ideal system in physics to study different phenomenon). when the spring is at rest the mass and spring remain in their stable state. when it is stretched or oppressed from the stable position it starts to oscillate between a compressed state and stretched state (You may have a question that why this happens? for now it is not our interest it will be dealt with afterward). Thus the mass and spring oscillate from their stable position. Along with it a graphical representation of the position of the mass over time is plotted, which forms a sine curve it represents a simple form of mechanical wave.

SIMULATION MADE BY J JOHN PAUL USING V PYTHON˘

So oscillations are also to and fro motion. Oscillations describe the to and fro motion of almost everything from mechanical systems, dynamical systems, and biological systems to mind and emotions. The oscillations can be best described using frequency and a waveform. The frequency gives the energy of the oscillation, the quality of vibration, and more similarly the waveform give the details about the origin, state, and future of the oscillations. Oscillations occur from the very atomic level to a very large level like in space-time or even a galaxy can oscillate. Almost all living and non-living bodies exhibit oscillatory motion or oscillations.

Oscillations can be of a periodic nature, non-periodic nature can be linear, or cyclic it can be anything. The mathematics of oscillation deals with the quantification of the amount that a sequence or function tends to move between extremes. In modern physics, we use oscillations to find the state of the particle. So the direct consequence of oscillations is waves. 

VIBRATION - Vibration literally means shaking, which is a Latin word. So shaking in one dimension is a to and fro motion and vibration in three dimensions is here and there motion. Mostly vibrations take place as a mechanical phenomenon. A mechanical phenomenon is a physical phenomenon associated with the equilibrium or motion of objects. A physical phenomenon is a natural phenomenon involving matter and energy. 

Some of the best examples of vibration are sound from our vocal cord, from musical instruments, the membrane of loudspeakers, vibrations of water molecules while heating, the vibration of mobile phones, and more. So vibration is also a to and fro motion that exhibits a mechanical phenomenon. 


THE CONFUSION - Are Oscillation and vibration the same or different

This confusion actually occurs for all the students but I have a good explanation to face this trick question. First, let us summarize what we know. 

  • Both oscillations and vibrations are to and fro motion.
  • Both oscillations and vibration can be represented as waves and their direct consequence is the formation of waves.
  • Both oscillation and vibrations fundamentally represent the same thing. 

Now look at the question from a deeper point of view we can have a clear question "If oscillations and vibrations are the same phenomenon which is to and fro motion the why some to and fro motion is called vibrations and few to and fro motions are called as oscillations?"

It should not be surprising for you that there is no perfect answer for this but there is a convincing justification for this which is discussed below. 

Well these two words mean the same phenomenon but we use them in a different context. 

Scientifically speaking oscillations can mean any event that has the essence of to and fro motion. Like the movement of tires on gravel, any random to and fro motion, the to and fro motion of magnetic and electric field which forms a light, the to and fro motion of a pendulum, the motion of a swing, the motion of a sew-saw and more. Oscillations are mostly desirable which means it is done wanted like if you want to swing a swing you have to do it and it can be changed accordingly. What I mean to say is that if you want to move a swig for a certain distance you can move it according to your desire. 

Oscillations mostly occur as a whole. Consider the swing, the swing is made up of many atoms or it is made of many individual particles while oscillating the individual particles act as one single particle and exhibit an oscillation.

If you take vibration, it seems more random than oscillation but it is not. the vibration is mostly undesirable which means we don.t obtain what we want. For example, take a tuning fork if you hit a tuning fork it will have a to and fro motion. Now if you take a tuning fork that produces an A note on hitting it you can only get a A frequency you can't get a C frequency from it without modifying the tuning fork. Similarly in all mechanical systems like cars, the bike we don't expect vibration to take place but it happens whit a certain frequency call as natural frequency.  So vibration can't be decided for the mechanical system, the system will vibrate on its own.

Vibrations mostly occur as individual particles. So if you take vibrations all the particles vibrate in a very random fashion and provide a net vibration as a whole. If you take the tunning fork it gives an A frequency but it is provided by superimposing many rand vibrations in the material of the tuning fork. 

Another important aspect is that vibration is mostly associated with the loss of energy but in oscillations, we provide energy to perform it. This can be best understood by taking a drummer as an example. A drummer swings his hand and hits the stretched membrane of the drum, here the action of hitting the drum i.e the motion of the hand can be considered as an oscillation whereas the to and fro motion of the drum membrane is vibration. 

The vibration of a drum membrane

 
Oscillation of the hand while playing drums
Taylor, John. (2017). Designing a Computer Model of Drumming: The Biomechanics of Percussive Performance. Human Technology. 13. 109-141. 10.17011/ht/urn.201705272520. 


So vibration and oscillation on a very basic level are the same which represent the to and fro motion but in a scientific viewpoint, they are different and use to denote the to and fro motion in different conditions. 


VIBRATION - Eternal motion

Eternal means existing or lasting forever. Each object that is visible to our eyes is made up of atoms and molecules. Mostly these particles have their own world to exist following some interesting rules. Now when you put a pollen grain on the surface and observe the interface through a microscope it will be seen that this pollen grain will jump here and there we don,t know why this happens in a macroscopic view. When we see it at a microscopic level it is clearly seen that it is because of the collisions of the washer molecules and the pollen grains, so for a collision to happen we require energy. The energy in a mass is stored via the mechanical phenomenon of vibration. So, everything in this world vibrates on its own and the reason for that is unknown. Even when the temperature is 0K (the coldest known temperature) the molecule has a vibration. So this undesired to and fro motion is kind of making the world stable by vibrating. That is why I call vibration eternal motion which is everlasting.

When anything vibrates it produces waves (a disturbance in space), so each and every object including us is emitting certain vibrations and these play an important role.  The consequence of this is resonance, natural frequency, constructive waves, destructive waves, and more (These will be dealt with in a different blog). So vibrations connect us to the cosmos. 

VIBRATION OF A GUITAR STRING

https://gfycat.com/warpedexcellenthairstreakbutterfly


DO VISIT THE ARCHIVE TO EXPLORE MORE 

Hope this article was useful and I hope you learned something from it.


If you have any theories or questions regarding this you are free to express them in the comments or you can chat with me on my Instagram page https://www.instagram.com/phy.sci/?hl=en.