Lists Home |
Date Index |
Even if predictable in principle, a problem is measurability
and the goodness of the measurement. In one direction lies
quantum theory; in the other is logical positivism or nominalism.
One could summarize the difference in the well known example of
the uncertainty principle: one can know the position of the
photon or its momentum but not both because the observer
perturbs the system (actually, the photon required to make
the measurement does). The quantum mechanic is comfortable
with that. The nominalist says that if it cannot be observed,
it does not exist or is 'meaningless'. The quantum mechanic
might reply, 'it is not meaningless; it is unmanageable'. Hence,
one realizes that at some levels, no controls are possible
but that above these levels, controls do emerge and the fascinating
subject is in why that happens if there is no intelligent observer.
If you are ready for very hard but illuminating slogging, google
for a paper entitled
"Scale Relativity in Cantorian Space and Average Dimensions of
Our World" - Castro, Granik, Naschie
"It is shown that within the framework of the new relativity
the cosmological constant problem is non-existent since the
Universe self-organizes and self-tunes according to the
renormalization group (RG) flow with respect to a local
scaling microscopic arrow of time."
From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
email@example.com (Roger L. Costello) writes:
>No, I really did mean to say non-deterministic. (My understanding is)
>that complex systems may appear non-deterministic, but there are
>underlying patterns that once recognized will allow you to predict the
>behavior. Until you understand those underlying patterns it appears
Even if you understand the patterns, the amount and kind of information
involved in these systems often defies collection and analysis, so
unpredictability remains. Meteorology, economics, and many aspects of
computing all face these kinds of issues regularly.
It's fascinating stuff, though.