On Monday, February 24, 2014 1:41:17 PM UTC, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
>
> Ghibbsa,
>
> To address one of your points.
>
> My P-time theory starts by accepting EVERY part of relativity theory and 
> adding to it rather than trying to change any part of it. If my theory is 
> inconsistent with relativity in any respect I would consider my theory 
> falsified.
>
 
To be honest this wasn't one of my points. This has already come up and 
been stated quite a few times. Feel free to try reading  but otherwise not 
to worry. 
 

> I'm not trying to replace relativity in any respect at all. I'm adding a 
> necessary interpretation and context to it, which it itself implicitly 
> assumes, though without stating that assumption.
>
> Edgar
>
>
>
> On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:48:54 AM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, February 22, 2014 8:12:05 PM UTC, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
>>>
>>> Ghibbsa,
>>>
>>> Well, first of all my theory doesn't tell nature what to do, it asks 
>>> nature what it does and attempts to explain it. All the issues you raise 
>>> are good ones, but when my theory is understood it greatly SIMPLIFIES 
>>> reality. It doesn't make it more complex as you claim. And in fact it 
>>> clarifies many points that relativity can't on its own, such as how the 
>>> twins can have different clock times and different real ages in an agreed 
>>> upon and empirically observable single present moment. Only p-time can 
>>> explain that.
>>>
>>> Relativity on its own just can't explain that... My theory makes it all 
>>> clear, and directly leads to the clarification of many other mysteries as 
>>> well, from cosmology to how spaceclocktime is created by quantum events. By 
>>> doing that it resolves quantum paradox, conceptually unifies GR and QT, and 
>>> explains the source of quantum randomness.
>>>
>>> So rather than complicating things, it simplifies and clarifies things.
>>>
>>> Edgar
>>>
>>  
>> Hi Edgar - if you thought something I asked was worthwhile why didn't you 
>> have a go at answering? 
>>  
>> I don't recall the two themes you answered in being part of what I put to 
>> you. I tend to throw out metaphor if it feels easier at the time, maybe you 
>> answered one of those literally, which maybe was a reasonable thing to do, 
>> no bother either way  my end. 
>>  
>> I've seen you reference that piece about not telling nature how to do 
>> things. It's certainly an idea to admire and agree with, and something to 
>> aspire to also. But what's really worth just for the knowing and speaking? 
>> How do you translate the goal of seeking to see nature as pure as possible, 
>> involving the least reflection of yourself? 
>>  
>> For example, I've put that front and centre by seeking the nature of 
>> discovery as a methodical procedure. How go you?
>>  
>> Also, if you are tempted to respond to just one of the questions I asked, 
>> the one I'd most like to hear back about is how you reconcile that back end 
>> logical perfection for initial conditions, with what nature then did when 
>> she got local to where we are? Why all the relativistic overlays and finite 
>> speeds of light, and fussy complex arrangements to minute scale, and all 
>> the rest? Why would she do all that if she already had something in the 
>> opposite direction that was perfect? 
>>  
>> p.s. we share a lot of basic instincts about the nature of the world. 
>> About infinity and its usage and so on. But as things stand, I actually 
>> regard p-time as one of the worser cases opf infinity like thinking. It 
>> might be finite in some key dimensions, but that absolute consistency, that 
>> sameness, that all corners of reality being in earshot of the same single 
>> drum. That's infinity thinking to my mind unless and until I can see why 
>> not. Infinity thinking isn't just about infinity, it's just any kind of 
>> magical thinking, in which nature is assumed capable of anything even at 
>> such an early stage as you envisage p-time
>>  
>> But I'm interested to see otherwise. You clearly have a good 
>> culturally-empirical mind
>>
>

-- 
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.

Reply via email to