On 30 Dec 2009, at 05:59, Colin Hales wrote:
> Jason Resch wrote:
>> Described in this article:
>> "This summation of all paths, proposed in the 1960s by physicist
>> Richard Feynman and others, is the only way to explain some of the
>> bizarre properties of quantum particles, such as their apparent
>> ability to be in two places at once. The key point is that not all
>> paths contribute equally to the photon's behaviour: the straight-line
>> trajectory dominates over the indirect ones.
>> Hertog argues that the same must be true of the path through time
>> took the Universe into its current state. We must regard it as a sum
>> over all possible histories."
> So we "must", must we?
Assuming mechanism, I don't see how we can avoid this.
> A mathematical construction by humans, happens to cohere to some
> with reality.
> A mere description.
> A million other descriptions, also constructed by humans, could be as
> predictive of how the universe appears.
> What extra belief system must exist in order that someone conclude
> we 'must' chose a "sum of all histories" as "the" story? Why is the
> universe compelled to be such a thing?
Well, then it is also the simple explanation of the behavior of
particles in nature. Something which, in my opinion, confirms the
statistics on computations which is forced by digital mechanism.
> Rhetorical question...don't answer. Just think.
> happy new year, everythingers.
Happy new year Colin,
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at