[FRIAM] Acid epistemology - restarting a previous conversation

[Steven A Smith]

Dave -

> 1) I am fascinated by the field of scientific visualization, using imagery to present complex data sets. Recently I "observed" the precise moment of sperm-egg fertilization. A whole lot was going on inside the egg cell boundary immediately upon contact (not penetration) with the sperm. The visualization was of thousands (millions?) of discrete inter-cellular elements breaking free from existing structures, like DNA strands, proteins, molecules and moving about independently. I could see several "fields" that were a kind of "probability field." These fields constrained both the movement of the various elements and, most importantly, what structures would emerge from their recombination.  "Watching" the DNA strand 'dissolve" and "reform" was particularly interesting because it was totally unlike the "unzip into two strands, the zip-up a strand-half from each donor" visualization I have seen presented in animations explaining the process.  Instead I saw all kinds of "clumps" form and merge into larger/longer "clumps" then engage in an interesting hula/belly/undulation dance to rearrange the structure into a final form.  All of this "guided" by the very visible "probability fields;" more than one and color coded.
>
> Now, if I were a cellular biologist could I make use of this vision?
>
> Since I am not a cellular biologist and have no understanding of inter-cellular structures/dynamics/chemistry, nor any DNA knowledge, where did the imagery come from and why did it hang together so well?
>
> Was this experience just an amusing bit of entertainment" Or, is there an insight of some sort lurking there?

I have some complementary experiences.   In a lifetime of trying to
facilitate insight to scientists and engineers by building tools to help
them visualize (perceptualize) their models of physical (and sometimes
highly abstract) phenomena I have seen "a thing or two".   What I have
seen more than anything is those researchers/practitioners increase the
scope of their intuition when facilitated by
computer-mediated-representation of their data.  

I have also seen naive false-positives generated in the process.  In
fact, the most common experience I have had is when I might present a
scientist with a novel (to them) visualization, they see anomalies from
what they *expected to see* and they usually question *my*
systems/software.   If it is a mature system/tool I am using, it usually
turns out that these anomalies are exposing errors/bugs in *their*
systems (data collection, grooming, modeling).  In the most rare (but
most useful?) case, it turns out to expose errors in their assumptions,
in the models themselves (not just the expression of them).   In the
very best case, the scientists came to me with an intuition, a
hypothesis and a rough model who needed to have those models coupled
back to there sensoria so that they could reinforce their own intuition
and/or invite colleagues into their hypothesis LONG before they had
everything nailed down.  

On the flip side, another common experience was "false positives".  
Often, simply applying mostly unmotivated interpolations to their
discretized data, I "accidentally" added (excess?) meaning to their
models.   Few sophisticated scientists make those mistakes, but
sometimes "wishful thinking" trumps "thoughtful awareness".

On the topic of "visualizing whirled peas"...   I have a lot of lucid
dreams, many of them about physical systems.   I reported here (and you
gave me a great Science Fiction reference) having months worth of lucid
dreams involving orbital mechanics and orbital mining/salvage.   I never
really imagined that these dreams were going to help me learn anything
revolutionary about orbital mechanics, at the very best, they either
provided me with loads of entertainment or perhaps *incremental*
improvements to *my* understanding of established orbital mechanics that
I have learned "the hard way" (studying the math).   

Do you have any reason for believing that your visions of cellular
fusion/fission are giving you fundamental or extravagant insights (as
opposed to incremental refinements) than that "they hold together well"?

- Steve