On 9/5/2012 6:52 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote:
I think he was just saying that point events do not exist.
So why discuss them?
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 6:23 PM, Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net> wrote:
Hi Folks,
I started reading the new Maudlin paper "Time and the Geometry of the
Universe". I got it and started reading. I stopped dead when I read the
following:
"Empirical considerations cannot establish the existence of such point
events, but the geometrical tools discussed herein presuppose them. It would
be pleasant to construct mathematical tools of geometrical analysis that do
not rest on this presupposition, but that is work for another time."
So what is the point of this paper? The author explicitly jettisons
empirical considerations. How is there any hope for falsification of
anything in it? I will continue reading but I am sad. :_(
AH! Maybe this remark only applies to the discussion of Newtonian
Time....
--
Onward!
Stephen
http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/Outlaw.html
--
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@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
--
Onward!
Stephen
http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/Outlaw.html
--
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@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
