Pierz, It may not be "physics" by your definition but both the Present moment and Consciousness are certainly part of reality, in fact they are basic aspects of reality.
Reality subsumes physics, if you want to define physics as just what is mathematically describable. Not all of reality is mathematical, but it is all logical since its computed. Obviously even a silicon software program is a logical structure but not all of that logic is mathematical operations. Edgar On Saturday, January 4, 2014 4:04:17 AM UTC-5, Pierz wrote: > > It's hard to stop arguing with an irrational person, isn't it? I've > already offered Edgar $100 to tell me any experiment that could be carried > out to falsify or validate his "theory" (that two separated events occur in > only one absolute order), but he immediately stopped talking to me. An > unfalsifiable theory is not a scientific theory. And Edgar even admits his > idea can't be rendered in mathematics ("like consciousness"). But > *everything* in physics must be able to be rendered into numbers, or it > just ain't physics. That's not the same as saying that only the > quantifiable exists, but it does demarcate a clear boundary between physics > and metaphysics. > > When Galileo showed theologians the mountains on the moon through his > telescope, which "couldn't exist" according to doctrine at the time, > because the moon had to be a perfect sphere, they invented ad hoc an > "invisible substance" that filled all the craters to the exact tops of the > mountains. Galileo agreed about the invisible substance, but said it was > piled twice as high on top of the mountains as in the valleys! The > invention of an ad hoc invisible, unmeasurable, unfalsifiable time > dimension to rescue the universal present moment from relativity is a > similarly disgraceful manouevre to that which the cardinals attempted in > order to rescue their Aristotelian cosmos. > > So far the only evidence that Edgar can evince for his theory is that it's > obvious to him. No maths. No suggested experiments. No means of measurement > except by some hand-waving reference to the curvature of the universe > (quote: "anyone know what that equation would be?" Sir, we have no idea > what you're talking about! It's *your* theory!) No falsification possible > except by fiat of Edgar Owen. Don't hold your breath. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.