Hi Platt, Marco and all,
PLATT
> I hope in your new essay for the forum you will explain how novel
> qualities arise from the rearrangement of elements that in themselves
> lack these qualities. To simply say they "emerge" is a description, not
> an explanation.
I'm not sure there is a rigorous difference between description and
explanation. You imply that you are looking for CAUSE for novel qualities. I
already addressed this in my "The End of Causality" essay.
>
> I eargerly look forward to your essay, not only for its explanation of novel
> emerging qualities but for the connection of the 2nd law to the MOQ.
> Will it be posted soon?
I was under the impression that I'd already started in that direction with the
causality essay. I admit that I didn't explicitly link it to the MoQ, but any
serious MoQer should be able to see plenty of hints. As for the new essay,
it's on my "to do" list. The ideas are all in my head, and many of them have
appeared in my numerous posts in the two MoQ discussion lists. What I still
need is some real FREE time to get it into essay form (not easy with a young
family and a full-time job).
MARCO writes:
> I also have problems to accept universe as a closed system. And not because
of
> the possibility of multiple universes. Let me try a simple consideration.
>
> I've heard that the system is expanding, so IMO it is not closed. Let's
admit
> that the total amount of energy is constant: if the system will go on
expanding
> forever, the density of universe will always go on decreasing.
Marco, in energetic terms, "closed" means that their is no input our output of
energy. There is no reason the system can't go on expanding in space.
>
> In this situation, the limit of entropy should decrease, also... or not? I
> mean: the expansion of universe will continuously insert in the universe a
new
> portion of universe that is less warm than the *old* universe.
>
> That is, entropy can't be reached.
>
>
> It seems too easy. Tell me where I'm wrong. :-)
You're only a little bit wrong. That is where you talk about a "limit".
You are touching on something that I haven't yet addressed in a previous post,
and now force me to reveal a key physical point in my proposed essay:
Entropy HAS no upper limit - it just goes on increasing. The doomsday picture
of "absolute disorder" is a situation that cannot be reached.
In a sense, that's the whole essay right there.
Jonathan
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
