[Philip Benjamin] A representation of reality is not REALITY itself. Atoms are complex structures. "Positive" protons do not repel each other within the nucleus, nor areelectrons drawn into nucleus. How did that "highly informed" complexity arise? Moreover the question of "aseity" of atomic constituents remain unsolvable. How can dead atoms produce a live duck! As far as observations go, only life produces life. The "aseity" of "LIFE" is more reasonable than "aseity" of dead MATTER. Only a degree of rationality, not absolutism, can be established here. The only law that is stable for a duck is DEATH! The Sentence of Death is universal (Law of Entropy). Only the Sentencer can cancel that. That is the difference between pan-Gaian-ism (earth veneration) and the Reverence of the Self-Existent who in Patriarchal, Prophetic and Apostolic revelation is Adonai (plural) YHWH (singular) Elohim (uni-plural). That is what Augustinianism is all about (or Neo-Platonism which he eventually gave up for Scripturalism). https://www.midwestaugustinians.org/conversion-of-st-augustine; https://www.puritanboard.com/threads/was-augustine-a-scripturalist-by-drake.64956/ This is TRUE Western History of Transformation of individual life and collective culture-which pagan politicians under the control of the WAMP with un-awakened consciousness reject with fury!!!! Philip Benjamin
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com <everything-list@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of Bruce Kellett Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2021 7:29 AM To: Everything List <everything-list@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Why are laws of physics stable? "No, atoms are more simple than ducks, and atoms are also more frequent than ducks because there are atoms in every duck but there is no duck in an atom. However, it seems that every object can be represented as a binary string, which is a useful representation in computer science. The problem with that is that it is dependent on the language in which you express things. The string 'amcjdhapihrib;f' is quite comples. But I can define Z = amcjdhapihrib;f', and Z is algorithmically much simpler. Kolmogorov complexity is a useful concept only if you compare things in the same language. And there is no unique language in which to describe nature. What a load of garbage! Science is not a matter of induction from observed data. What is science a matter of then? Maybe it is a matter of finding laws. And laws are not just empirical generalizations obtained by induction. -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/SA0PR11MB47042C5551A2413FCE9076A2A8049%40SA0PR11MB4704.namprd11.prod.outlook.com.
