Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> Peter Jones writes:
> > Physical determinism is the idea that the
> > future is genrated form the persent by rigid physical
> > laws. As opposed to the idea that the future is fixed
> > becasue it is already "there", like the end of a movie
> > which is already in the can , and need not bear any logical
> > relation to what has gone before (especially
> > if it is a david Lynch movie).
> I don't see how you can distinguish between a movie + projector
> system and any other deterministic physical system.

If you change th N'th fream of a move, the N+1'th frame
does not change

If you change the N'th stage of a causally-linked physical process
the N+1'th stage *does* change.

> If I turn the
> projector on with the film in place, the ending of the movie is neither
> more nor less fixed than the final arrangement of billiard balls if I hit
> one of them with the cue. If I had hit the first ball a little differently,
> or the air currents in the room had been a little different, then the
> final arrangement of balls would have been different, but then if the
> chemicals in the film had undergone some unexpected reaction, or the
> motor of the projector started to behave differenltly, then the film
> on the screen would also have been different:

The only way the end of the film can change is if
something happens to the *final* frames. The frames
of the move are not causally interlinked.

What makes a process a process is that changing one part of it changes
other parts.
I have explained this before.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to