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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to