Re: the universe

Posted by
DA Morgan on Feb 10, 2004 at 09:19

Re: the universe (Pasti)

You wrote:
"Well, we can talk more about incorrect.Maybe incomplete,yes,but incorrect,that is another story entirely."

And I mean incorrect as in absolutely incorred, invalid, worthless. This is not a case like Newton vs. Einstein where a theory was extended. I think that anthropomorphized concepts like start and stop or beginning and end are meaningless. And will end up, in the future, as quaint 19th-20th century ideas that are the subject of party jokes like the no infamous "flat earth".

You wrote:
"No offense Dan, but for the time being everything keeps going, it is the natural way."

No offense taken but "for the time being" is about as large a waffle as you could have served on the breakfast plate. We know nothing about time. We don't even know what it is. Perhaps it pervades all other dimensions, perhaps it doesn't. We can't even say for sure that it has granularity though I think most suspect it does.

You wrote:
"the bravery is there, you just don't know about it"

I am well aware of it. Remember where I teach. A lot of it goes well over my head but I am certainly in the thick of much of it. I was referring to you personally. It often appears to me that you are thinking inside the box. A box created from string and M theory and uncertainty, etc. but still well inside the traditionalist box.

I don't think the answer is there. I think the answer is simpler. In fact so simple as to be beyond our grasp. I want to see challenges to constructs such as speed and accelleration.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup



[ Forum ] [ New Message ]