On 11/2/2012 12:23 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
How can anything emerge from something having non properties? Magic?
Dear Bruno,
Why do you consider "magic" as a potential answer to your question?
After thinking about your question while I was waiting to pick up my
daughter from school, it occurred to me that we see in the Big Bang
model and in almost all cosmogenesis myths
<https://www.google.com/#hl=en&sugexp=les%3B&gs_nf=3&tok=1XoTsmBbCpme0mnC57FQ9Q&cp=18&gs_id=3&xhr=t&q=cosmogenesis+myths&pf=p&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&oq=cosmogenesis+myths&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.&fp=41b2cca49596839e&bpcl=37189454&biw=1527&bih=812>
before it, an attempt to answer your question. Do you believe that
properties are innate in objects? If so, how do you propose the
dependency on measurement, to 'make definite' the properties of objects
that we see in quantum theory, works?
My pathetic claim is that properties emerge from a 'subtractive
process' (hat tip to Craig) between observers and that the One (totality
of what exists) has all possible properties simultaneously (hat tip to
Russell Standish).
I have never understood what aspects of QM theory are derivable
from COMP. Do you have any result that show the general
non-commutativity between observables of QM, or do you just show that
the linear algebraic structure of observables (as we see in Hilbert
spaces) can be derived from 1p indeterminacy? The linear properties and
the general non-commutativity properties of operators (representing
physical observables) are not the same thing...
--
Onward!
Stephen
--
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.
