Dear Lauri,
You wrote:
Laws should be independent of each other.
Why? Who says so?
Cheers,
Joseph
- Original Message -
From: Lauri Gröhn
To: fis@listas.unizar.es
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2008 11:50 AM
Subject: Re: [Fis] Neuroscience of art
Hi all,
I am
Robin, Wittgenstein’s “meaning as use” is mostly related to meaning of words
and sentences. And analytic philosophy is not in favour of considering
evolutionary approaches.As the systemic approach goes with a bottom-up
perspective usable for simple organisms, I do not feel that it can be
Prof. Grohn, List:
I am curious about what you are seeking to communicate when you write:
I am afraid that list can't be validated as a set laws. Laws
should be independent of each other.
What is the rational for your feelings about law (singular) vs laws
(plural)?
Is it necessary
Lauri -- Well, let's see:
(1) First Law of thermodynamics: The total
energy of a thermodynamically isolated system
remains unchanged.
(2) Second Law of thermodynamics: If there are
any energy gradients in a system, they undergo
transformations from one form to another, with
some of it
Hi everyone,
I saw John Onians, who writes below, speak at a conference here in
Australia and was impressed by his work. I didn't want his message to pass
unremarked because there's much underneath that relates to this
discussion.
Onians explores how physical materials are part of the loop
