On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Les Schaffer <[email protected]> wrote:
> while ok for classical physics, you might want to hedge your bets a tad on this one when it comes to general relativity and cosmology. no one has yet been able to formulate a totally agreeable/proper "book-keeping" procedure for conservation of *total* energy. there are papers written on this going back decades, but you won't find it mentioned in the public press. Point taken, Les. I'll add a footnote to say that, given that in social life stuff and people move (with respect to one another) at speeds substantially below c, the conservation law applies to our experience. As soon as a significant number of humans and their artifacts begin to move (again, relative to one another) at speeds approaching 1/10 c, then we are ignorant about whether energy conservation law continue to apply or how it may need to be modified. Once these issues are settled, I am hoping the physicists will hand us a set of Lorentz/Einstein equations or such to transform our Galilean view of the first law accordingly. Richard Feyman once said that he was not scared about not knowing things, lost in a mysterious universe without purpose (not clear whether he meant himself not having a purpose or the universe lacking one, which a godless universe is largely a purposeless one if we subtract humanity from it). Anyway, I think he could afford that level of comfort because of civilization and the scope of his concerns. But if we view capitalism as the impending negation of all civilization, then one should feel the pressure to know the world.
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
