Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!brl-tgr!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-tgr.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: net.physics
Subject: Re: Re: Re: meta-physics
Message-ID: <456@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Tue, 6-Aug-85 00:35:58 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.456
Posted: Tue Aug  6 00:35:58 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 7-Aug-85 03:31:36 EDT
References: <455@busch.UUCP> <9161@ucbvax.ARPA> <408@spar.UUCP> <155@prometheus.UUCP> <320@brl-tgr.ARPA> <158@prometheus.UUCP>
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab
Lines: 46

> ... But what is a photon, really. ...  But, what is an electron.

Both a photon and an electron are concepts that are intended to
denote physical objects that in different ways appear to be
particulate.  The current conception of them is not so simple as
you described.

> What I am after is to deepen our understanding.

Good goal.

> In the beginning there was only one dimensional space.
> Nothing existed outside of this space, and there was only one
> object in this space.  Time was meaningless in the sense that the
> information density (field density, energy density) is infinite
> there so time is frozen in the present.  Another way of looking
> at it is that there is no past and no future, because the present
> has crowded them out.
> 
>   Then existence (information..) was released into a two
> dimensional space and a multiplicity of objects formed.  And,
> later still information was released into three space.  ...

"Then"?  If time is frozen, how can it progress?  You are also
still not defining what your term "information" means; it cannot
be the same as in information theory..

> ...  Without information in three space there is
> no coordinate system, no measure or no points.  Introduction of
> a single neutron in to three space (infinitesimal micro big bang)
> would generate that "metric".  

What introduces this neutron?  Why do you say that there can be no
metric without whatever it is you mean by information?

> For now, get yourself a video camera and monitor and go make an
> artificial "reality".  It's actually fun.  ...

Physics is supposed to be the study of real reality.  All this
speculation is interesting in its way, but it does not appear to
be driven much by observations of the real world.  If it were
more quantitative, perhaps it could be tested against reality.

Obviously, you wouldn't claim to have been around "at the
beginning" to watch the dimensions unfold as you describe.
So where do you find any evidence of these things?