> Can mathematics describe an EVOLVING universe as accurately as it can
> describe a static one? Newton's laws and Einstein's relativity and all
> the subtle variants on these help to do so. Bruno's comp hyp seems to
> address an 'eternal' if not somewhat static reality that might even be
> taken as 'transcendental'.
> Who is dealing with the CHANGING nature of the universe?

I don't think "change" is any different from a static model with extra 
dimensionality.  At least in our universe, time is tightly tied to space, 
and can be run backwards and forwards in a sense, from what we can 
determine.  Change is not something that is unapproachable to mathematics, 
or inherently metaphysical...many branches of mathematics (analytical 
calculus, for one) are solely purposed for descriptions of change.


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 

Reply via email to