On 16 Jun 2014, at 00:13, LizR wrote:
On 16 June 2014 08:51, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
I don't see that the theory has any consequence outside of assigning
labels. That's why I have pressed you for some testable
prediction. For example, your theory might have something to say
about the holographic principle or the black hole firewall problem
because those are both on the border of physics and information.
Nice question.Those points are also on the border between GR and QM,
I believe. If comp could actually get a result in that sort of area,
that would be very impressive.
It has to be like that for QM, from which space-time might be defined,
if we get the tensor calculus.
Keep in mind that if comp is true, GR and QM cannot solve the mind-
body problem at all, nor even address it really (except today more and
more QM people realize the importance of the notion of information,
which some indeed makes physical, not without good argument. The fact
that energy seems to be needed to erase information is very troubling
in that respect.
Somehow I doubt anything like that's on the (event) horizon, though...
I think GR and QM will be expalined in term of simpler theory, by
physicists, and thsi again explained in term of simpler theory, by
physicists, and eventually get the simplest theory which will be
derived from arithmetic.
We can dig on both side.
To use comp today to get GR directly (like we get QM logic) would be
like trying to use string theory to make better pizza.
I exaggerate a bit, as Golblatt got a nice other result which might be
exploited here, like the axiomatization of a notion of "now it is the
case that, and it will always be the case that" in Minkowski
spacetime, with a soundness and completness of the modall logic S4.2 =
S4 + <>[]p -> []<>p. That is a strong weakening of the modal quantum
logic formula p -> []<>p, and it might make sense for some p in the
sigma_1 arithmetical intepretation of either S4Grz1, Z1* and X1*.
Diodorus Chronus is a ancinet greek who defined "necessary" by "now
and always" , and that has been studied extensively with notion of
linear time. But Goldblatt model spacetime by the Minkwski space, and
gives the logic of the diodorean modalities.
Goldblatt Robert, "Diodorean Modality in Minkowski Space time". In his
book:
Goldblatt, R. I. (1993). Mathematics of Modality. CSLI Lectures Notes,
Stanford California.
http://www.amazon.com/Mathematics-Modality-Center-Language-Information/dp/1881526232
So we might not be that far from GR. IIrreflexivity, like when staring
from G, could make the logic distinguishing two and three dimensions!
Bruno
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
