Science, Art, Litt, Science based Art & Science Communication
It is important that you remind science criteria as follows:
Five basic requirements for a field to be considered scientifically rigorous: clearly defined terminology, quantifiability, highly controlled experimental conditions, reproducibility and, finally, predictability and testability.
Whatever techniques are proposed for fine art, they should be examined by these criteria.
News that I claim are extrapolations arising from my profession optical builder, in which I apply some chapters of physics.
I notice your publications, relating to, general knowledge, as well as other publications arising from your profession.
I go through them although I have not education to understand
everything you write
I find out however some information that complements
And in the case of research for the Dioptical-bioptical art occur adjacent assumptions that are recognized as having characteristics as
I think though that my techniques withstand scientific criteria,
less criterion for quantifiability, because compositions
of fine art are evaluated subjectively
I checked my efficiency techniques by learning of students at the University of Architecture.
I present and the composition executed by student Oana R.
Although the composition Dioptical-bioptical is for Both Eyes.
However to look normal, even with a single eye, it is perceived as a conventional composition but is distinguished by an original structure.
When then looks with eyes crossed, appear, effects of Dioptical-bioptical, obtaining shocking differences.
I notice these two aspects because Dioptical-bioptical occurs in the first stage (when viewed normally, relaxed) as conventional painting (can be presented in exhibitions and as usual the painting) and in the second stage, the cross-eyed gaze painting comes with effects Dioptical-bioptical (revealing the painting for both eyes).
*) About preaxiomatic in context Diotical-bioptical
PRE-AXIOMATIC DOMAIN Domain comprising statements relative
to thought, emotions, existence, metaphysics, transcendence, etc.
with relatively uncertain validity. These statements refer, however, to organized sequences.
..........to organized sequences > relative to the establishment of criteria
Iliescu Liviu; Arta Bioptica (Bioptical Art - training of bioptical vision),
Crater, Bucharest, 1998,
148 pages. ISBN 973-9029-37-X.
pag. 87 Aleatoriul si inflatia de idei
For example here include a major French philosofer Henri Bergson ;
general assumptions as in philosophy.
Henri-Louis Bergson (French: [bɛʁksɔn] 18 October 1859 – 4 January 1941) was a major French philosopher, influential especially in the first half of the 20th century. Bergson convinced many thinkers that immediate experience and intuition are more significant than rationalism and science for understanding reality.
…….See; 1907, Creative Evolution (L'Evolution créatrice)
Post keyword: preaxiomatic
A Lakatosian research programme is based on a hard core of theoretical assumptions that cannot be abandoned or altered without abandoning the programme altogether. More modest and specific theories that are formulated in order to explain evidence that threatens the 'hard core' are termed auxiliary hypotheses. Auxiliary hypotheses are considered expendable by the adherents of the research programme - they may be altered or abandoned as empirical discoveries require in order to 'protect' the 'hard core'. Whereas Popper was generally read as hostile toward such ad hoc theoretical amendments, Lakatos argued that they can be progressive, i.e. productive, when they enhance the programme's explanatory and/or predictive power, and that they are at least permissible until some better system of theories is devised and the research programme is replaced entirely. ……………..
Lakatos propose donc un réfutationnisme sophistiqué : les scientifiques travaillent dans le cadre de programmes de recherche scientifique qui comportent un noyau dur et une ceinture protectrice d'hypothèses auxiliaires. Seules ces dernières sont soumises à réfutation. Un programme de recherche est caractérisé à la fois par une heuristique positive (ce qu'il faut chercher et à l'aide de quelle méthode) et une heuristique négative (les domaines dans lesquels il ne faut pas chercher et les méthodes qu'il ne faut pas employer).
Un programme de recherche peut être progressif (générateur de connaissances nouvelles, capable de prédire des faits inédits et d'absorber les anomalies, gagnant en influence) ou régressif (devenu incapable de prédire des faits inédits, perdant de l'influence et des adeptes parmi les scientifiques). Des programmes de recherche concurrents peuvent donc coexister durablement, ce qui contribue à expliquer la vivacité des débats scientifiques.