[David M]
Cause is the wrong word and not the point I am trying to make.
Future event is also the wrong concept, as events are actual and present
and I'd not suggest any future pre-existence.

Rather I am pointing out that in processes that have tendencies of outcome
rather than certainties of outcome, there is implied in such a process a set
of possible states, only one of which will become actual, and therefore what
becomes actual is limited by the possibilities available. Beyond these lie
the impossible, but within what is possible a choice has to be made, it is
called the collapse of the wave function by physicists, where as Dirac
says 'nature makes a choice', at the human level we just say we make our 
existential
choice.

[Krimel]
Sometimes I thing you and I are grappling with the same concepts, we just
can not agree on the vocabulary to capture them. History does tend to have
some kind of inertia. So for example we have confidence that the sun will
rise. But tomorrow's sunrise is not a factor in allowing us to conclude that
it will happen. It is the string of past sunrises that gives us confidence
in tomorrow. We have confidence in the occurrence of future events because
of their consistence in the past. It is the past that lets us construct the
future.

As for Dirac's quote, don't you think that many of these quotes from
physicist are often given in an attempt to simplify their subject for
general consumption? I mean I love them too and am fond of quoting them but
aren't they often constructed so as to sacrifice clarity for truth?

My previous post on probabilities spreading out from the certainty of the
present applies here as well.

moq_discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

Reply via email to