Physics and Tautology.
=.
1
Where did the masses for ‘ big bang ‘ come from ?
These masses came from surrounding space.
2
Where did these masses from surrounding space come from ?
These masses came from ‘big bang’.
===.
Why is he poor ?
Because he is stupid.
Why is he stupid?
Because he
If this universe has zero net energy charge and angular momemtum, I see no
problem being created via a chaotic inflation scenario.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
Hi Ronald,
I have a severe problem with this entire thread!
What exactly determines the particular properties, such as charge,
angular momentum, mass, etc., of this universe? Why are we assuming that
the choice of what went into the zero net sum is a prior definite and
constrained.
On 8/2/2012 12:18 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
Hi Ronald,
I have a severe problem with this entire thread!
What exactly determines the particular properties, such as charge, angular momentum,
mass, etc., of this universe?
They are conserved quantities, so if they are zero now it
On 8/2/2012 5:06 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 8/2/2012 12:18 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
Hi Ronald,
I have a severe problem with this entire thread!
What exactly determines the particular properties, such as
charge, angular momentum, mass, etc., of this universe?
They are conserved
Physics and Tautology.
=.
1
Where did the masses for ‘ big bang ‘ come from ?
These masses came from surrounding space.
2
Where did these masses from surrounding space come from ?
These masses came from ‘big bang’.
===.
Why he is poor ?
Because he is stupid.
Why he is stupid?
Because he is poor
Isn't every (alleged) proof of something's truth just a list of things
(steps) implied by the previous statement until one arrives at the final
statement...a tautology?
Briefly: isn't every proof just a (possibly lengthy) list of tautologies?
Therefore, using that notion, calling out alleged
In a message dated 12/05/1999 8:57:28 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There is an obvious normalisation problem with the usual model of
branching histories in MWI (I see from your signature you at least
accept that!). Since the total number of histories (belonging
On Thu, 4 Nov 1999, Russell Standish wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 1999, Russell Standish wrote:
[JM wrote] [BTW I am getting tired of RS omitting the attribution]
^^^ Blame my email software. I almost always leave the .signatures in
to make it obvious who I'm responding to.
Since your
On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, Russell Standish wrote:
The measure of Jack Mallah is irrelevant to this situation. The
probability of Jack Mallah seeing Joe Schmoe with a large age is
proportional to Joe Schmoe's measure - because - Joe Schmoe is
independent of Jack Mallah. However, Jack Mallah is
Chris Maloney wrote:
This harkens back to a thread I started some time ago about our universe
being the one, or among the ones, that admit the most SASs. Clearly the
number of observer-moments among the human race is vast, if you assume the
MWI. Most people replied that they thought it was of
On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, Russell Standish wrote:
[JM wrote]
Obviously you don't understand. With the ASSA, it is always
possible to find the conditional probability of an observation given a
suitable condition. Choosing a condition and asking a question about it
changes nothing about
On Mon, 6 Sep 1999, Russell Standish wrote:
On Fri, 3 Sep 1999, Russell Standish wrote:
Then maybe I misunderstood you. A tautology is a term with redundant
parts, ie it is equivalent to some subset of itself. I took your
statement that ASSA is a tautology to mean that ASSA
13 matches
Mail list logo
