Hi Paul,

I just took an excerpt from something I wrote before; and just wondered your opinion:

"Is this right?: Dick takes the 'totally unknown data' and notes it has been transformed by a 'totally unknown process' much as if you found yourself in a swarm of bees in a big sphere in outer space and you knew that your movement is coded into your perception of the other bees' movements. So your unknown movement has performed an unknown transformation on the other movements.

He makes some basic definitions; that is he chooses some arbritrary rest-positions to differentiate the other data from. Like stating that you'll regard a few bees as being at rest or in a fixed relation; and see how all the other data must behave or not behave because of the very fact of your chosen resting-places or fixed-relations (i.e. definitions or pattern conservations).

He looks at the logic and symmetry of the sums of partial differentiations. Because he is dealing with relationships of combinations and uncertainties I guess that's why quantum mechanics falls out.

(from a post to Alex that he appeared to largely agree with)

• Whew!! - pmartin - November 12, 2001 - 19:31 UTC
  • Limits of Mathematics - dolphin - November 17, 2001 - 06:26 UTC