Re: [APML] Re: Science in Astrophotos?

["Jim Vineyard" <sky4me@msn.com>]

Hi Jerry,
  You wrote,
> But, I think it is too much of an oversimplification to say that the two
> hemispheres of the brain function completely separately.

  Oh no, I think you misread me.  Probably my fumbling attempt to cobble
together some ideas in a meaningful way.  The left/right brain idea is, I
agree somewhat dated and I've heard of some of the more recent
investigations you mentioned.  The reference to completely separately
functioning brain hemispheres was only applicable to persons with certain
medical conditions.  Obviously most people have a functioning corpus
collosum.  And obviously people can learn new modes of thinking, which was
part of my point.  But the colloquial left/right brain theory is still of
some value I believe in underscoring there are separate cognitive abilities
employed in the disciplines of Art and Science and their formal academic
presentation which, if we specialize, can bias our world view by developing
a dominant pattern of thought which can lead us to discount the value of the
other.

> And, if this is being taught in religiously based parochial schools these
> days, then I'm sure it's wrong.

  In an effort to maximize political freedom, and on the advice of council,
I'll plead the 5th.   :-)

> There may be lots of example of duality, but both parts make up the whole.
> Is the glass half full or half empty?  Well, it's both. <G>

  Exactly, I agree, and this was part of my point.  It is a mistake to see
astrophotography as "only" a Science or Art.  It is a melding of both to
various degrees depending on one's motivations for producing it.

> If scientists are so different than artists, why are the physicists so
hung
> up on the "beauty" of a theory?

  In purely mathematical terms and the understanding fostered by them some
of it is downright elegant in its universal simplicity and beauty.  Is this
evidence of anything supernatural, again the 5th.

> BTW, it wasn't Einstein that said "beauty is truth, and truth beauty". It
> was John Keats.

  I genuinely appreciate the correction whoever actually said it.

> I totally agree with you about it being fine art if you enjoy it!

  Actually I agree with everything you've said in light of my clarifications
except the original idea of science as a sub-category of art.  Though I can
see how the nonscientist could see it as such.  I still maintain they are
separate cognitive disciplines for the most part and believe
astrophotography employs elements of both.

BTW, Nice deft wielding of the Light Saber a couple weeks ago too.  Obi Juan
would be proud.

Jim Vineyard

Visit my Astro-photography website at:
http://www.homestead.com/sky4me/astrophotography.html


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Lodriguss" <jml@astropix.com>
To: <astro-photo@seds.org>
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 5:32 PM
Subject: Re: [APML] Re: Science in Astrophotos?


> Hi Jim,
>
> You make a lot of good points.
>
> But, I think it is too much of an oversimplification to say that the two
> hemispheres of the brain function completely separately.
>
> And, if this is being taught in religiously based parochial schools these
> days, then I'm sure it's wrong.
>
> I just don't think things are that simple, and I think more recent
research
> is finding that many of the functions previously thought to be taking
place
> only in one hemisphere are not that localized specifically.
>
> For instance, I write with my right hand, and throw a baseball right
> handed, switch-hit right or left, but I shoot a basketball with my left
> hand.  I used to be left-eyed dominant but I've trained  myself to use
both
> eyes for my sports photography shooting, depending on which was working
> better on a given day.
>
> There may be lots of example of duality, but both parts make up the whole.
> Is the glass half full or half empty?  Well, it's both. <G>
>
> If scientists are so different than artists, why are the physicists so
hung
> up on the "beauty" of a theory?
>
> BTW, it wasn't Einstein that said "beauty is truth, and truth beauty". It
> was John Keats.
>
> I totally agree with you about it being fine art if you enjoy it!
>
> Jerry
>
>
>
> At 05:14 PM 2/16/2002 -0800, you wrote:
> >A Long one....
> >
> >Oke dokie, here I go....
> >   I think weather astrophotography can be viewed as Science or an Art
> >depends on the motivations of the producer of it.
> >   I cannot accept Science as merely a sub-category of Art.  I see
Science
> >and Art as definitely separate, ultimately as separate as the two
> >hemispheres of the human brain.  We are creatures of duality.  And recent
> >investigations into actual brain functioning support this.
> >   If this idea is a new one to you then realize the human brain actually
> >does have two independently functioning hemispheres.  This has been
> >established in the mainstream through the study of persons who have had
> >their corpus callosum (connective tissue) severed between their two
> >hemispheres either through accident or surgery (to relieve certain
profound
> >types of brain dysfunction).  The idea that we actually consist of two
> >separately functioning "brains" is even being taught in some religiously
> >based parochial schools these days.
> >   This is not new to humanity and has been expressed throughout our
entire
> >history.  It's no accident the Chinese idea of Ying and Yang, pragmatism
vs.
> >passions, yes or no, the rule of law vs. unbridled freedom, a digital
view
> >of the world, all make sense within the human mind.  Everything about the
> >human physical structure is symmetry.
> >   I'm not familiar with universities all around the globe but I can say
the
> >ones I've seen are organized along the lines of Colleges of Natural and
> >Physical Sciences, and Colleges of Arts and Humanities.  Each focusing on
> >"separate" types of human cognitive endeavors.  I think even the rub of
> >distaste between Religion and Science, Creation and Evolution, Artists
and
> >Scientists, all of which being seen as mutually exclusive, is actually at
> >the root just expressions of the physical duality of our brains.
> >   It is a mistake to think "the other half" has nothing to offer of
quality
> >or value.  Likewise, most can readily recognize an individual practicing
a
> >single-sided extreme of any of these dualities and label them as
> >"unbalanced", artsy-fartsy, a total nerd or dwebe.
> >   I left the Sciences behind (at the end of a most successful quarter,
> >important to the long term ego you know) and crossed into the "other
world"
> >while still studying at a university.
> >   Personally, I left the Science side of things because I'd become aware
> >that the type of Science I was studying was so focused that it was
excluding
> >all my other interests, and profoundly altering my human relationships.
The
> >competitiveness was so strong that you could actually see some colleagues
> >becoming unbalanced in their intellectual abilities and altered
attitudes.
> >I even think you could often see it in their eyes, some of them, and even
> >watched it happen, the right eye being bright clear and focused
(physically
> >connected to the left hemisphere), the left dulled (connected to the
right),
> >due to the intense "left brain" focus at the very heart of the Physical
> >Sciences.  Mind you, this didn't seem happen to everyone, but probably
only
> >those who shouldn't have been there to begin with, not really inherently
> >having what it takes, most being filtered out, unless they had some
wholly
> >un-rational drive to continue.  The truly capable virtuosos at it never
> >seemed to exhibit this.
> >   Is astrophotography Science or Art?  No wonder we are struggling with
the
> >question.  I think it depends on what your motivations are.  Did you set
out
> >to do some Science in your mind, or did you set out to make some
beautiful
> >photographs.  Or, once you've applied all the Science that goes into
> >astrophotography, do you then sit back simply to enjoy the result, if
this
> >is the case then I think your motivation is artistic weather you realize
it
> >or not.  Or, after applying all the Science of obtaining it, do you look
for
> >scientific value, or technical merit, then clearly this is a scientific
> >motivation for the pursuit.
> >   If you're a "balanced" individual the answer may not be so clear, and
the
> >question may be a bit like chasing your own tail for a "concise"
scientific
> >answer if you tend to be generally left-brain functional (as most of us
here
> >are).
> >   For our purposes, I think the answer is most often that the motivation
is
> >actually right-brain artistic enjoyment since we are doing it because we
> >"enjoy it", one of  the actual definitions of the word "amateur".
> >   Just as most colleges and universities which offer courses in
Photography
> >of any sort consider it to be in the "Fine Arts" category and teach it as
> >being so.  We too, in the end are, even in some cases un-knowingly,
> >participating in an Art-form.  Weather it is "Fine" art is a question of
> >your own subjective interpretation, and personal value you place on any
> >particular exhibit of the result.
> >   For those who are generally offended by the term "art" applied to
their
> >work and find the term somewhat distasteful, consider that "Art" is not
> >necessarily a slighting term in any sense actually.
> >   For a bit of an example would you rather be proficient in the Science
of
> >love-making, or the Art of it?  If you had to specialize, which would you
> >choose?  If you "had" to come up with a left-brain concise answer?
> >   Astrophotography...... I ultimately do for the shear enjoyment of an
> >esoteric knowledge of a part of our existence.  The enjoyment of the
beauty
> >of the natural universe.
> >   The thrill of scratching beneath the surface and knowing of something
at
> >the very edge of the "actual" physical mysteries of human existence,
> >overseen by a God or not.  I suspect most of us here do likewise, only to
> >different degrees, and with only slightly different motivations.
> >   To me there're all ultimately "pretty pictures" or should I say
"Beautiful
> >Photographs."  And occasionally, in those moments of understanding them,
I
> >think, as I believe Einstein said... "beauty is truth, and truth beauty".
> >   At these times I actually "enjoy" the science of it all.  The melding
of
> >Science and Art.  Both halves of the brain in agreement.  And because I
> >"enjoy" this so much, it is Fine Art.
> >
> >My 29¢ worth,
>
>
>
>
>
> Astrophotography, Tips and Techniques
> for Digital Enhancement in Photoshop:
> http://www.astropix.com
>
> --  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
>              Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>
>



--  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
             Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>