From rlpowell@csclub.uwaterloo.ca Mon Feb 12 11:16:53 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rlpowell@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 12 Feb 2001 19:16:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 18629 invoked from network); 12 Feb 2001 19:16:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 12 Feb 2001 19:16:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca) (129.97.134.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 12 Feb 2001 19:16:37 -0000 Received: (from rlpowell@localhost) by calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) id OAA13583; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 14:22:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 14:22:31 -0500 To: michael helsem Cc: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] More damn imaginary world stuff Message-ID: <20010212142231.K15198@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> Mail-Followup-To: michael helsem , lojban@yahoogroups.com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from graywyvern@hotmail.com on Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 07:14:08PM +0000 X-eGroups-From: Robin Lee Powell From: Robin Lee Powell On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 07:14:08PM +0000, michael helsem wrote: > >From: Invent Yourself > li'o > > > >physics > > > involves a logical contradiction.> > > > No. It may be that any deviation from the actual laws of physics (known > >and > > > unknown) is physically impoossible -- that no world could actually exist > >in > > > any other way -- but that is far from LOGICAL impossibility, that the > >laws > > > imply, in themselves, a contradiction. > > > > > > >Are you saying that it is impossible that the laws of physics are arranged > >such that any other arrangement requires a logical contradiction? Can you > >show me an alternate arrangement that is logically consistent? Since we > >don't have our complete picture yet, we are not yet sure if any other > >alternate arrangements are logically possible. > > > > IIRC, there was somebody who reformulated the existing "physical > laws" according to INFORMATION rather than energy, in the 70's (i > blush to admit i read this in Analog); being tautological & a pain > in the gizzard to think in terms of, it never caught on: but this shows that > another Physics than the one we know, is indeed possible in this same > universe... If you are interested in this sort of thing, you may want to read The Life Of The Cosmos, by Smolin (can't remember his first name), a professional particle physicist. Written for a lay audience, very enjoyable. -Robin -- http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/~rlpowell/ BTW, I'm male, honest. Information wants to be free. Too bad most of it is crap. --RLP