You know it sounds like semantics to me, rather then physics as we know it. However, that has been stated, more or less, by everyone from Bohr, onwards, regarding the quantum, which is not what was discussed in your book, but relativity.Conjecturally, the light cone, in principle could be hacked if a light cone really exists as part of the universe. Unless, like a platonist, things exist as mathematical abstraction? In any case, it sounds like a great book. Thanks.
-----Original Message----- From: John Clark <[email protected]> To: everything-list <[email protected]> Sent: Sat, Apr 23, 2016 6:56 pm Subject: Re: Trespassing On Einstein’s Lawn On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 spudboy100 via Everything List <[email protected]> wrote: > Sounds like a profound book. What do you think is mean't by the author stating: 6) A person’s light cone might provide the boundary to turn nothing into something. If "nothing" is infinite unbounded homogeneity then "something" must be finite bounded and heterogeneous . Your past light cone is finite and bounded and lumpy and all the information needed to turn nothing into you must be contained on that boundary. My past light cone is slightly different from yours and that's why we're different things. John K Clark -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
