On 09 Jan 2014, at 22:45, LizR wrote:
On 10 January 2014 10:33, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote:
I think the question is whether comp determines that the world is
(locally) Lorentz invariant. If it is, then c is just a unit
conversion factor between the + and - signature terms. It's value
is arbitrary, like "how many feet in a mile", which is why it is now
an exact number in SI units.
Oh yes, I seem to remember that physicists like to set c (and h?) to
1.
So does comp predict that any TOE will have a unique solution -
namely the one we experience? So is this an alternative to the WAP -
we experience a universe compatible with our existence because such
a universe has to drop out of the interations of conscious beings in
Platonia?
It is not the same. WAP use a form of ASSA, where comp uses only RSSA.
(Absolute versus Relative self sampling assumptions).
We might revise step seven, as this should be understood from it. Any
TOE (that is any first order logical specification of any universal
system taken in the ontology) must give rise to the same physics, at
least for each pints of view. It gives the same theology, more
generally, and physics is defined through it.
We can come back on this.
Bruno
--
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
