----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bruno Marchal" 
To: "Saibal Mitra" 
Subject: Re: objections to QTI 
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 15:24:56 +0200 

> Le 01-juin-05, à 15:00, Saibal Mitra a écrit : 
> > Hi Norman, 
> >   
> > I entirely agree with Julian Barbour. A fundamental notion of 
> > time would act as a pointer indicating what is real (things that 
> > are happening now) and what was real and what will be real. Most 
> > of us here on the everything list believe that in a certain sense 
> > 'everything exists', so the notion of a fundamental time would be 
> > contrary to this idea. I think that that most here on the list 
> > would consider time as a first person phenomena 

Barbour doesn't believe in time at all, let alone "fundamental" time. Barbour 
doesn't talk about "space-time capsules" because he doesn't believe that time 
> Indeed. (SGrz pour those who knows). I would like to know if Norman 
> and Saibal and others agree that there is nothing special with 
> time. Why does not Julian Barbour talk about space-time capsule? 
> (Or does he?) 
> I think space is also a first person phenomena. OK? 
> Bruno 
> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ 

I completely disagree with Barbour. Just for the record.

Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com

Reply via email to