On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 Evgenii Rudnyi <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I understand but the question in principle still remains. Who play the > chess, I or the M-theory? > There is no logical reason to think those two ways of explaining the same phenomenon are incompatible. It's true that the reason a toy balloon doesn't collapse is that the momentum of gas atoms inside the balloon impacting the surface is greater than or equal to that of the gas atoms outside the balloon impacting the surface, but it's also true that the reason is just that the pressure inside is greater. Sometimes humans find that a high level description and explanation is more useful and sometimes they do not. Trying to understand how hurricanes work by looking at the level of atoms would not be very enlightening, and super-strings would be even less helpful. John K Clark -- 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.
