On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 11:01:46 AM UTC-6, Brent wrote: > > > > On 9/22/2019 11:36 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: > > > > On Sunday, September 22, 2019 at 10:55:35 PM UTC-6, Brent wrote: >> >> >> >> On 9/22/2019 8:52 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: >> >> Of course they are mathematically possible. You just need to start with >>> the right axioms. Everything mathematically possible that is not self >>> contradictory (including a flat Earth and flying pigs). >>> >>> Brent >>> >> >> I don't see dark bands as mathematically possible since these regions >> have 100% destructive interference. AG >> >> >> They have destructive interference in a universe that satisfies quantum >> mechanics. How do you know there isn't a universe that satisfies Newtonian >> mechanics? or Harry Potter mechanics? Or Aristotelian mechanics? >> >> Brent >> > > So now you're saying that everything *conceivable* is possible. But isn't > that what you criticized Jason for? AG > > > Yes, I did. And above I'm criticizing you for not recognizing the > difference between nomologically impossible in this universe under the > physics as we understand it, and Tegmark's everything mathematically > consistent happens in some universe. > > Brent >
In fact I looked up "nomologically" and I'm not clear as to your meaning. Jason said "everything conceivable", so you pointed out what amounts to destructive interference and flying pigs as things that don't happen in our world. Why do that, and then turn around and mention universes where QM doesn't work. Let's just say that Jason didn't misuse the term, and leave it at that. AG -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/8b461c50-95e7-4093-aa77-d5924bc85578%40googlegroups.com.
