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?