Hi Glenn, Andrea, David L. and all,
GLENN
> If someone asked me "Does nature work by abiding to laws?" I would be flat
> out lying to myself if I said "no". I'm not saying Newton's or Einstein's
> are the exact ones nature uses, but surely these are on the right track.
> You need to explain to me how I deluded myself into thinking this way. If
> all you can say is "this is the behaviour of things" and be done with it,
> then you really haven't said much.
It should be clear from our posts that both Andrea and myself dissent from
this view.
Let me distill the conflicting positions:
You: Nature follows laws
Me: Laws follow from nature
Your version implies strict causality, and begs the question where do the laws
come from?
In my version, laws are not causes, but DESCRIPTIONS, and if they are good
descriptions (according to Occam's Razor), they are simple, brief and have
wide scope.
I think that we can find a degree of agreement in that we perceive nature to
behave mostly in a predictable and consistent fashion.
GLENN
> In answer to your technical question:
> you feel an upwards force on your feet because there's an equal downward
> force.
Force and reaction - it isn't YOU that experiences the downward force. It is
the ground.
DAVID LIND
>you CAN feel the
>downward "force" - try it. From where you are right now, notice the
>"pressure" you feel on your seat (i'm assuming) and then notice your
shoulders - is there not a feeling of being pressed down?
I feel an UPWARD force on my buttocks. I feel nothing pressing on my
shoulders.
Let me ask David and Glenn a question:
Supposing the ground you are standing on suddenly gives way, and you fall a
long way (like Alice). Now that you are falling, and there is no longer any
force on your feet (or buttocks), has gravity ceased to exist?
GLENN:
>The downward force that keeps you pegged to the earth is called
> gravity.
Your "force" is derived from a certain understanding nature. It is not
empirically evident except by intellectualization. Einstein provided an
alternative intelluctualization, by which gravity is described as a trajectory
rather than a force. It is only according to Newton that trajectory and
acceleration imply the action of a force. This is not empiricism.
Jonathan
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
