Sean Harrison

The Real Threat to Marriage

In Uncategorized on July 17, 2012 at 12:05 pm

A good quote:

The real threat to the institution of marriage is not homosexuals wanting heterosexuals to recognize their same-sex marriages, it is Christians standing in a church and saying “for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death us do part” and then getting divorced a few years later. The real assault on marriage is by serial adulterers who preach family values like the thrice-married Newt Gingrich. As Doug Bandow has recently said: “When it comes to sex the Republican Party is divided. A few members actually don’t believe it is the government’s business. However, the GOP is full of leaders with multiple marriages engaging in multiple affairs who lecture everyone else about the importance of sexual morality.”

from Should Libertarians Be Conservatives? by Laurence M. Vance


Studying Science

In Uncategorized on October 11, 2011 at 10:35 pm

I’m slogging through MIT 18.03, ordinary differential equations. I generally understand the concepts, but combining them to solve problems is sometimes difficult, and some of the problems I don’t understand. Even so, I enjoy learning this material and trying to solve these problems, and that whole world is fascinating to me. Eventually I’ll finish with the ordinary differential equations course, and then I’ll begin my journey with classical mechanics.

I have real weaknesses in my mathematical education, in my ability to do mathematical reasoning and problem solving. The same could be said of my geometric education. I have been wrestling with how best to overcome these weaknesses. One solution is to create courses in all these mathematical subjects. After all, the best way to learn a subject is to teach it. If I can teach these subjects well, then I will be much more solid in my grasp of them myself. Rework all of my study materials into my own words and explanations. Record the proofs, work through them, and explain them as best I can. (The course materials in MIT OCW are available for this sort of use – I can shamelessly use all of it, as long as I publish the results non-commercially if at all.)

Last night I was browsing Newton’s Principia. Two things struck me: First, back then mathematical physics was called natural philosophy. There’s something wonderful about that label, something true that “mathematical physics” doesn’t communicate.

Second, Newton had a very firm foundation in Euclidean geometry, using his Euclid to prove physical principles. There is a mathematical approach to proof, and there is a geometrical approach to proof. It is good to have facility in both approaches, because both mathematics and geometry are at play.

Today we saw an actor playing Einstein – it was one of those one-man monologue shows. Very well done, with a reasonable German accent cloaking the actor’s native east coast one. Einstein solved some of the hardest problems in physics by doing two things well: (1) He kept working at a puzzle for a long time, and (2) He suspended common sense (as the actor put it) to follow the puzzle wherever it would take him. That is how he was able to conclude that that the speed of light is absolute, that time therefore is not, and later that space as well is not absolute. Along the way he articulated a relationship between mass, energy, and the speed of light, unifying so much in the universe by that amazingly simple equation, E = mc2.

I wonder if, by suspending disbelief and meditating for a long while on a puzzle, one could find a solution to the next puzzle that the universe has for us.

Theoretical physics, it seems to me, has been mired for a good long while now – several decades – and a lot of what is being done seems like very expensive thrashing. Experimental particle physics is being conducted on increasingly expensive and enormous machines like the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in Switzerland. Meanwhile, theoretical physicists are cataloging ever more fundamental particles to explain the data from the high energy experiments, while others are inventing ever more dimensions to explain the subtleties of strings that can never be measured or verified. Physics is like a black hat trying to crack strong encryption through brute force, by running every possible combination. The secrets of the universe is very secure, and something smarter than brute force is going to be needed to open them further.

Physics needs another dreamer with deep reflection and profound insight. The high power, high cost, vast resources methods have had their day in the sun. I wonder if the time isn’t at hand for the stars to rise on a more reflective, more insightful way of studying the physical universe. And I wonder if it can’t be worshipful and worship-prompting, giving honor to the one who deserves it above all others.

It’s interesting to ponder. Meanwhile, I have a great deal of material to master if I’m going to be able to understand and explain these things to others. I am in the process of trying to boot a very complex operating system. My hope is that the underlying principles will prove to be relatively simple and straightforward, enabling me to hold the operating system in working memory . . . and build on it.

God is Not Tame

In Uncategorized on September 7, 2009 at 6:53 pm

N.B. I wrote the following while teaching a personal essay workshop at the Western Sun Literary Festival, May 7, 2009, at Rochelle H.S. -SAH

I was raised with the implicit understanding that I would always be provided for, that I had no need to worry about where I would live or what I would eat. I was certain that God was with me.

Shortly after I was married, all of that changed. I was working as a teacher, an adjunct professor of English at several universities. I was low on the totem pole, and enrollment was down. So, my classes were cancelled, and had to find other work. I worked as a janitor, a bank teller, a house painter, a remodeler. I managed to scrape by, but just barely. This went on for two and one-half years, as the skills I had learned growing up were shelved and new skills were being born. I learned to work very hard, like I had never done before. During that time I thought, not that God had left me, but that God had determined that I must go through this. I learned that God was not who I had thought he was. He was much, much bigger.

Eventually, my good break came, and I landed a job using my more natural talents, and finally earning a reasonable living. But I have never forgotten that I must work very hard to live. And I have never forgotten that God’s presence is not tame.