A. Wolf wrote: >> But not a logical contradiction. It would just contradict our assumed >> model of physics, i.e. a nomological contradiction. >> > > I realize I can't give a concrete example from physics due to the lack of > total human understanding, so it is difficult to get across the exact point. > If we presume that our understanding of the relationship between space and > time is correct, then it would be a contradiction to observe true FTL > transmission of information, because that would cause paradoxes > (contradictions) in the structure of the universe itself. > > >> It does unless there are some axioms and rules of inference such that >> adding the thing I envision allows one to infer a contradiction. That's >> why I was asking about the model - does it have axioms and rules of >> inference? >> > > All models of mathematics have axioms, but only those (I postulate) which > are non self-contradictory "exist". A universe that includes a model of > naive set theory cannot exist, for one example, because it is > self-contradictory. A universe that contains an elementary model capable of > describing the ideas of naive set theory can exist, though. > > Anna > So universes that consisted just of lists of (state_i)(state_i+1)... would exist, where a state might or might not have an implicate time value.
Brent --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
