Russell,
thanks for your fime and effort to reply. 3 things:
1. You picked my Hawkng typo, I have many more. I do
recall that post and it gives me while writing, the
subconscious vacillation: which version is the right
and which the left? Very rarely do I wright his name.
2. You use usable (used) physics views in a topic way
away from classical physics views, puting a systems
talk into space-time measuring with a morphology I
cannot (don't want to) follow in this thread.
3. In your last par you said it: "isolated from the
rest of the unkiverse" exactly the singularity I DO
identify with Tom's description of a "closed system".
And 2Qs:
Yours:
> What is an unknowable closed system?<
If nothing (including information) "comes out" it must
be pretty "unknowable". In that ballgame ou suppose:
it turns "open" from "c;osed" and then again "closed",
I assume it disappears from our observation. I see no
indication that it keeps the same coordinates when
dissappeared as we found kit at when it was "open".
The coordunates you want to find it at dissipate as
well.
Not to mention the changes "or" world ujndergoes to...
Mine:
RSt:> Usually because it doesn't move :) Consider
> something inside a shielded container in a
vacuum...<
How is "move" identified in connection with (my
version of) closed system (singularity) with no
interconnection in space lor time of OUR habiturl
system? Assigning coordinates to "no-info" sounds
funny. And the shielded vacuum container is Physics
101.
I am on a different track...
Regards
John M
--- Russell Standish <r.standish.domain.name.hidden> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 01:33:37PM -0700, John M
> wrote:
> >
> > Russell, you 'opem' and 'close' a system? Why
> woulod
> > you close it, once it is already open? and how
> would
> > you find it again, when it is closed?
>
> Usually because it doesn't move :) Consider
> something inside a
> shielded container in a vacuum - many physics
> experiments are like
> this.
>
> Closedness, of course is an idealisation of the real
> system.
>
> >
> > And how do you assess those "closed system laws",
> if
> > no info goes in or out? (need an intelligent
> design?)
> >
>
> As I said - by measuring the system at two points,
> in between which
> the system is closed. How the system evolves between
> those points in
> time will be closed system evolution.
>
> > Is OUR time-scale valid to the inside of an
> unknowable
> > closed system? You decide as you need - see below,
>
> What is an unknowable closed system?
>
> >
> > I segregated the black-hole type phantasms which
> allow
> > action INTO them - and Hawkins had to make
> allowance
>
> Caution - misspelling Stephen Hawkings' name is
> considered a sure sign
> of a crank (I can't seem to lay my hands on the ref
> here...)
>
> > even for them to 'release' SOME information as I
> > understand. Well, these things are our
> brainchildren,
> > not 'ntaure's' so we identify them as we need it.
> >
> > John M
> >
>
> Are you saying black holes are meant to be closed
> systems? I would
> have thought otherwise, unless it is isolated from
> the rest of the
> universe in some way.
>
> --
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308
> 3119 (mobile)
> Mathematics 0425
> 253119 (")
> UNSW SYDNEY 2052
> R.Standish.domain.name.hidden
> Australia
> http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
> International prefix +612, Interstate
> prefix 02
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Thu May 04 2006 - 11:06:18 PDT