On 10/31/2024 8:28 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:
On Thursday, October 31, 2024 at 4:53:27 PM UTC-6 Brent Meeker wrote:
On 10/31/2024 3:07 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:
On Thursday, October 31, 2024 at 1:44:15 PM UTC-6 John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 1:37 PM Alan Grayson
<[email protected]> wrote:
> /Wheeler's answer explains nothing,/
*I think it explains a great deal,especially considering the
fact that it's only 13 words long. *
*Wheeler is just translating EFE, Einstein's Field Equation, into
words. I have no objection if you like it, but IMO it adds
nothing, explains nothing beyond what the equation states. AG *
*
*
*> */just repeating what EFE says/*, *
*Maybe, maybe not.Google says EFE is aSpanish news agency,
but I don't know if that's what you meant. And by the way, IHA.*
*
*
/>There could be an unlimited sequence of "why's", /
*
*
*Yes there could be.*
*
*
/> or the sequence might terminate in profound knowledge,
but likely NOT in an event without a cause, /
*That doesn't make any sense.If the sequence terminates inX
then wouldn't you want to know _WHY_ it terminates in X ? If
X is"/NOT in an event without a cause/"then you'd want to
know what sort of thing DID cause X, and how and why it did
so; therefore the sequence of "why" questions does _NOT_
terminate with X.*
*Since we're nowhere near what we're speculating about, this
train of thought is useless. However, I affirm that an
irreducible event is unintelligible to human understanding.
Without some rule for the emergence of an event, aka a cause,
there is no way to understand it. *
*A rule would just be Einstein's equations plus a few rules for
applying them. A cause would be something different and prior in
time. *
*A rule for one person, could be a cause for another person! Don't ya
think? *
*I think of a rule as passive and persistent in time; as compare to a
cause which is acts at a particular time.*
*There could be an unintelligible assertion at the foundation of one's
understanding OR what you describe below. But suppose there is a God.
How could he/she abide by, tolorate. irreducible random events? *
*I think he/she would create them, aka "miracles".*
*What tools or whatever could he/she use to make something happen or
not happen? *
*Traditionally words. It's easy to see that the concept of god was just
an elevation of the tribal strongman who got things done by giving orders.
Brent
*
*I see what bothered AE about this concept. AG. *
*Given your assertions there is either always going to be an
unintelligible assertion at the foundation of one's understanding
OR there's going to be a circular relation of concepts that you
may follow around until you reach one that you understand. I
think of this as a virtuous circle of explantion, something like this:
Brent
*
*Some people think probability can be conceived of as a cause. I
disagree with this conclusion. 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 visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/e85d9193-435b-444a-a554-32f4f63e13e6n%40googlegroups.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/e85d9193-435b-444a-a554-32f4f63e13e6n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
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 visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/53303e79-4da1-4584-864d-e3e34dd204a1%40gmail.com.
