----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruno Marchal"
To: "Saibal Mitra"
Subject: Re: objections to QTI
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 15:24:56 +0200
>
>
> Le 01-juin-05, à 15:00, Saibal Mitra a écrit :
>
> > Hi Norman,
> >
> > I entirely agree with Julian Barbour. A fundamental notion of
> > time would act as a pointer indicating what is real (things that
> > are happening now) and what was real and what will be real. Most
> > of us here on the everything list believe that in a certain sense
> > 'everything exists', so the notion of a fundamental time would be
> > contrary to this idea. I think that that most here on the list
> > would consider time as a first person phenomena
>
>
Barbour doesn't believe in time at all, let alone "fundamental" time. Barbour doesn't talk about "space-time capsules" because he doesn't believe that time exists.
> Indeed. (SGrz pour those who knows). I would like to know if Norman
> and Saibal and others agree that there is nothing special with
> time. Why does not Julian Barbour talk about space-time capsule?
> (Or does he?)
> I think space is also a first person phenomena. OK?
>
> Bruno
>
> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
I completely disagree with Barbour. Just for the record.
--
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
Received on Wed Jun 01 2005 - 17:14:56 PDT