> On 27 Oct 2018, at 17:41, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Saturday, October 27, 2018 at 3:20:23 PM UTC, John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 5:40 PM <agrays...@gmail.com <javascript:>> wrote: > > > the concept of a plane wave, one of the solutions of Maxwell's equations. > > It certainly doesn't exist in THIS universe > > I agree with the general point you're trying to make, just because something > can be consistently described mathematically doesn't prove it must exist > physically. However if you're interested in the waves that enter your radio > telescope and consider them to be plane waves the error in doing so can be > made arbitrarily small by increasing the distance from the point source or by > decreasing the size of the antenna. As a practical matter because the things > astronomers study are so distant and their antennas are so small they can > treat the waves they're interested in as plane waves and produce no > measurable error by doing so. But a designer of optical microscopes would not > have that luxury because the lens of a microscope is large compared to the > distance from the sample, so he could not treat them as plane waves. > > John K Clark > > A spherical wave asymptotically approaches a plane wave as it progresses in > space and time, but it never becomes a plane wave. This where the rubber hits > the road for the MUH; we have a mathematical construct that doesn't exist in > physical reality.
Assuming there is a physical reality. Personally I assume only one Turing universal machinery. I use it to define all the others, and to study the map of their interfering sharable dreams, hopefully with measure one ([]p & <>t). Assuming a physical reality, by default, is not a big deal when doing physics, but is a very strong assumption when doing metaphysics or theology. It is a strong ontological commitment, and it is inconsistent with the mechanist assumption in the cognitive science. Doing “theology” with the scientific attitude consist in making clear the minimal ontological assumption, and building from there. Not coming up with a “solution” and imposing it like a dogma. > Moreover, since the amplitude along the wave front is a plane, the wave > changes instantaneously in every direction along the plane for every > increment of time however small, which I refer to as "instantaneous with a > vengeance". So, as far as I am concerned the MUH is easily falsified, and why > it continues to interest people is baffling. AG It seems to me that you are the one coming up with extraordinary assumptions, and tar like if we have succeeded to solve baffling problem with our best theories (marrying GR and QM), the mind-body problem, etc. 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 > <mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com > <mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list > <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
