Dear Brent,

----- Original Message ----- From: "Brent Meeker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Stephen Paul King" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2005 1:30 PM
Subject: RE: Bitstrings, Ontological Status and Time



Julian Barbour's idea of time is just an ordering relation between
self-contained 'capsules' (i.e. 'states'). Just as the states of your brain
could be ordered according to the memories stored in them.



[SPK]

Yes, that is also my understanding of Julian's idea. The problem that I have is that he seems to completely ignore the necessary conditions requires for the "construction" of the time capsules. It is like assuming that an infinite pile of photographs exists without wondering exactly how the photographs came to be structured the way they are and to encode information they way they do.

Using the well-order that exists over the Real numbers to "explain" the ordering of events in time is cheating! Additionally, Julian seems to ignor that observables, prior to the specification of the details of measurements, are not Real valued, they are Complex valued; Complex values are not well ordered!

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ComplexNumber.html

Rates of change are measured by comparing clock states within different
capsules. Clock's are physical devices for providing very simple memories,
i.e. how many seconds have passed. So called "good" clocks are just the ones
that make dynamical equations simple.



[SPK]

Julian never seems to explain how the "comparison" process itself that must exists between capsules gets coded into the time capsules, that I ever understood...

Stephen



Reply via email to