Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> On 17 Aug 2009, at 22:41, Flammarion wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 17 Aug, 14:46, Jesse Mazer <laserma....domain.name.hidden> wrote:
>>> 1Z wrote:
>>>>> But those space-time configuration are themselves described by
>>>>> mathematical functions far more complex that the numbers
>>>>> described or
>>>>> explain.
>>> But what is this "primary matter"? If it is entirely divorced from
>>> all the evidence from physics that various abstract mathematical
>>> models of particles and fields can be used to make accurate
>>> predictions about observed experimental results, then it becomes
>>> something utterly mysterious and divorced from any of our empirical
>>> experiences whatsoever (since all of our intuitions regarding
>>> 'matter' are based solely on our empirical experiences with how it
>>> *behaves* in the sensory realm, and the abstract mathematical
>>> models give perfectly accurate predictions about this behavior).
>> Primary matter is very much related to the fact that some theories of
>> physics work and other do not. It won't tell you which ones work, but
>> it will tell you why there is a difference. It solves the white rabbit
>> problem.
>
> QM mechanics solves mathematically the white rabbit problem. I do
> agree with this, but to say it does this by invoking primitive matter
> does not follow. On the contrary QM amplitude makes primitive matter
> still more hard to figure out. Primitive matter is, up to now, a
> metaphysical notion. Darwinian evolution can justify why we take
> seriously the consistency of our neighborhood, and why we extrapolate
> that consistency, but physicists does not, in their theories, ever
> postulate *primitive* matter.
Not explicitly, but physicists generally accept that some things happen and others don't;
not only in QM but in symmetry breaking.
Brent
>
>
>> We don't see logically consistent but otherwise bizarre
>> universes because they are immaterial and non-existent--not matter
>> instantiates
>> that particualar amtehamtical structure.
>
> Are you defending Bohm's Quantum Mechanics? The wave without particles
> still act physically, indeed they have to do that for the quantum
> disappearance of the white rabbits.
>
> Bruno
>
>
>
> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
>
>
>
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 Tue Aug 18 2009 - 10:36:02 PDT