Dear Joseph, Pedro & Otto, Just my own 2 cents on a topic with which I have little familiarity. I heartily agree with our dear departed friend Michael Conrad. We are indeed looking at the underlying physics of the universe, however, I would maintain (and I think that Joseph and Otto would probably agree), the physics we see is not entirely subsumed under the conventional scientific metaphysics. In fact, I wrote a book trying to articulate in systematic fashion what I think that amended metaphysics looks like. <http://people.clas.ufl.edu/ulan/publications/philosophy/3rdwindow/>
Greetings to all, Bob U. > Dear Pedro and All, > > Thanks to Pedro again for this thought-provoking theme. We are all in > states of greater or lesser ignorance regarding it! > > Here is just, again, a thought about your quote of Conrad: "when we look > at a biological system we are looking at the face of the underlying > physics of the universe." > > I.M.H.O., this statement is true but only partially so. There are > non-thermodynamic parts of the underlying physics of the universe that are > not visible at the biological level of reality, and a coupling between > them remains to be demonstrated. Quantum superposition and self-duality > have analogies in macroscopic physics, but quantum non-locality and > sub-quantum fluctuations do not. > > Of course, if you allow slightly altered laws of nature, many things may > be possible as Smolin suggests. However, I suggest that the domain of > interaction between actual and potential states in our everyday 'grown-up' > world also has things to tell us, e.g., about information, that can be > looked at more easily. > > Best wishes, > > Joseph _______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
