Epistemology 101

Noise is the background state of the Universe. It is movement or energetic flux across the whole spectrum, the general hub-bub of the reality in action. It comes from heat, star light, nuclear activity, lightning and magnetic fields.

Noise may contain signals, though generally when considering a signal that we've selected, we ca claim that everything else is noise. In this sense 'noise' means something we don't want.

Energetic flux may be converted into a variance in some other quantity, like electricity or light intensity. Some device called a transducer does this for us. As examples;

• An antenna/aerial is a length of electrically conductive wire extended in space to turn electromagnetic (radio) waves into am electrical potential (voltage).
• A microphone is a variable capacitor or inductor attached to a planar diaphram so as to convert rapid changes in air pressure into a varying voltage.

Not all signals are measurable. We may not be able to transduce a signal because it exists in some hitherto undiscovered dimension of physics. For example; mechanical audio technology existed before the discovery and application of electro-magnetics.

More often we may have a transducer but the signal exists beyond the capabilities of it, in;

• amplitude
• frequency
• dynamic range

The signal may be too quiet, even if amplified. The signal may exceed the bandwidth of our measuring system. The difference between the loudest and quietest parts of the signal may be too much for our transducer or amplifier.

Measurable signals may contain desirable and undesirable components. If we apply a selector or filter to a signal we can get closer to something we are looking for.

However, here lurks a problem. It is somethiing we call Shannon-Weaver, but to be honest I think it's better explained in words by the philosopher Quine.

The notion of information is indeed clear enough nowadays when properly relativised. It is central to the theory of communication. It makes sense relative to one or another pre-assigned matrix of alternatives. You have to say in advance what features are going to count. – Quine 1970

It is a problem for two types of listener, those searching for extra-terrestrial life (SETI), and intelligence gatherers listening to 'chatter'. Assuming any communication exists within a signal often leads one to "find what you're looking for". The effect is further magnified by psychological effects of patternicity, an enormous and probably insoluable problem with "AI" (simulated neural networks).

Nontheless if you have made it this far and sucessfully transduced, selected and matched an extant "map of meaning", then you have "data".

Most data is junk. Sturgeon's law says about ninety percent of it. In reality is it far, far greater. Only a miniscule slice of all data obtained, transmitted or recorded has any significance at all.

This data can inform us. It confirms or disconfirms some hypothesis we have about the source of the data.

Note the receiver is presently employing two additional devices, a mapping that allows data to be obtained from measured signals and something of significance that can apparently be inferred from that data.

Biological beings are primarily concerned with food, shelter, mating, child-care, predators and threats. If you are not hungry then information about food may not pique your attention. If information pertains to some goal or need of our organism it may "attend" to (meaning: to go along with or follow) it.

Perhaps the heart of epistemology is the question of what we can know? What is knowledge?

Justifiable true beliefs

Knowledge coming from multiple sources creates a new level. It is confirmed or agreed upon according to some standard. However we may not yet use the word "accepted", as acceptance implies some authority

There are two subtle interpretations of "common" here. The first pertains to distributed commonality. If I can hear something, see something and smell something, it is a stronger impression than by one sense alone (Berkeley). A modern fire alarm might use many transducers, one for smoke particles, one for infra-red heat, and combine them to obtain more certainty. Neither dust nor reflected sunlight alone could cause a false positive.

The other interpretation of common is as ordinary or widespread, perhaps existing within the centre of some sampling distribution curve. Herein lies democracy, populism and the "wisdom" of crowds.

We see that, still, this cannot be the ultimate epistemological test, since at some point, through a process of assumedly fair measurement, interpretation, and selection Donald Trump was determined the best of all possible leaders of The United States. Furthermore this was twice confirmed. We must look further…