It was probably back in the 1940's I first ran into the idea of "alternate universes".
Great speculation, enjoyable, but that's all.
Of course, if you are a fan of "subjective reality" (whatever that may be) the "alternates" can be important. But, they are not now a part of confirmed objective reality.
Harry -----------------------------------------------
Ed wrote:
Ray, I think its more of a question of 19th Century certainty about reality versus 20th and 21st Century puzzlement about the nature of reality. Newtonian versus quantum physics, if you like. A recent article in Scientific American on mulitiple universes proposed that each of us is living, has lived, will live an infinite number of lives in this universe and others. There are no spacial or temporal boundaries, so it's all possible. Even the time and space we occupy is filled with an infinite number of possible variations of ourselves. It sounds nuts to me, but it does suggest that we've moved from a mechanistic understanding of nature and society in which all things could be explained if you but discovered the first principles to a far more speculative understanding in which the first question to raise is whether there are such a things as first principles.
Ed Weick
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ray Evans Harrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Selma Singer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "pete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Harry Pollard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 10:42 AM Subject: Re: [Futurework] new book
> So we may be getting down to the crux of the matter on all of this George > stuff. Harry believes in a "reality of scale." The rest of us do > not. Instead we believe in a constantly changing mutual agreement as to > what constitutes reality from the subjective realities that are the worlds > that we each deal from. 19th century versus 20th century thought. So it > has nothing to do with the efficacy of all of the stories as science but > instead as the political reality of whose story will end up on top. > Interesting. > > REH > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Selma Singer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "pete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Harry > Pollard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 9:53 AM > Subject: Re: [Futurework] new book > > > > questions for the group: > > > > If the only language you know does not have a word for the color gray, do > > you think you will see the color gray? Will you see it as gray in the same > > way as someone whose language does have a word for that color and who has > > seen that color labeled as such? Or will it look different to a person who > > doesn't have a word for it than it does to a person who has a word for it > > and has seen the color with that label? Will it look more green or blue to > > someone whose language has a word for green or blue but not gray? > > > > Selma > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Harry Pollard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "pete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 9:35 PM > > Subject: RE: [Futurework] new book > > > > > > > Pete, > > > > > > The only reality I can confirm is objective. > > > > > > No-one can confirm subjective reality. > > > > > > But, I enjoyed your post. > > > > > > Harry
**************************************************** Harry Pollard Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: (818) 352-4141 -- Fax: (818) 353-2242 http://home.attbi.com/~haledward ****************************************************
--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.484 / Virus Database: 282 - Release Date: 5/27/2003
