Re: Regarding Aesthetics

From: Michael Rosefield <rosyatrandom.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 14:45:40 +0100

Why should there be only one correct TOE? Can't we simultaneously inhabit
alternative universes that are currently indistinguishable to us yet differ
on a fundamental level?

--------- 3-line Narnia ---------
C.S. LEWIS: Finally, a Utopia ruled by children and populated by talking
animals.
THE WITCH: Hello, I'm a sexually mature woman of power and confidence.
C.S. LEWIS: Ah! Kill it, lion Jesus!
--------- McSweeney's ---------


2008/9/15 <marc.geddes.domain.name.hidden>

>
>
>
> On Sep 15, 6:08 pm, Brent Meeker <meeke....domain.name.hidden> wrote:
>
> >
> > But the question is whether there would be any *functional* difference.
> >
> > Brent Meeker
>
> Sure, if reductionism were true, half of physics wouldn't work.
>
> Yudkowsky claims: "It is not that reality itself has an Einstein
> equation that governs at high speeds, a Newton equation that governs
> at low speeds, and a "bridging law" that smooths the interface.
> Reality itself has only a single level, Einsteinian gravity."
>
> Ref: http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/09/excluding-the-s.html#more
>
> But this another non-sequitur in a long long of misconceptions,
> superficial analysis and non-sequiturs from him.
>
> In his example, of course it's true there's only one correct equation
> (the Einstein one), but this mathematical *equation'* references
> *physics concepts* on several different levels of abstraction. It's
> the *concepts* that are non-reducible, not the *equations*.
>
> The physics of forces (Newtonian mechanics is not reducible to the
> physics of simple geometric solids (Greek physics) , nor is the
> physics of space-time fields (Relativity) reducible to the physics of
> forces. Each of these (greek physics, newtonian mechanics,
> relativistic physics) introduced new physical concepts which weren't
> reducible to the earlier ones. It's not so much that new physics
> concepts *replaced* the older ones, rather that the new concepts were
> at * a higher-level of abstraction* than the old.
> I
> Also note that modern String Theory says that the fabric of theory
> itself is composed of concepts of Category Theory, which are high-
> level mathematical representations of lower-level ones.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Fri Sep 19 2008 - 09:45:53 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:15 PST