On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 11:28:21AM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> 
> On 17 Jan 2014, at 21:36, Stephen Paul King wrote:
> 
> >Another take is : http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0403031
> >
> >Deriving laws from ordering relations
> >
> 
> That is very good, as Cox approach in general except for a lack of
> RSSA, which seems to be introduced in Knuth's work.
> We don't need it, as all this is covered by the fact that the laws
> will indeed be based on the Kripke (and non Kripke) semantics of the
> modal logics extracted from the machine discourse. More on this when
> I will explain a bit of modal logic to Liz.
> 
> Bruno
> 

Hmm - the question is more open than that. Whilst Kripke,
etc. semantics shows some promise, as you showed in your thesis, by no
means has it been shown that we can derive physical law from it. I
think we should keep all options on the table, and look for
connections between them, as different techniques will provide those
derivations more easily or more difficult. Think about the effect of
the AdS correspondence with string theory.

-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics      hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
University of New South Wales          http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
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 everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to