Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Hey Dick

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Harvey on April 9, 2002 16:42:46 UTC

Good to see you as chipper as ever...

***First, you are confusing the idea of "Logic" and the idea of a "model". The "logic" statement I made was that, if the information to be examined prior to proposing a model was infinite, then, as the examination of the information cannot be completed (from the definition of "infinite"), and no model can be proposed. That is, no model can be based on an infinite amount of information. I never said the information available was finite! I just said: if it is, you can't examine all of it!***

Let me quote your paper:

"Reality is defined to be a set of numbers. First, let us divide that set into subsets which are to be examined.. This examination referred to is defined to be the information available to our sense... These subsets of reality (sets of numbers) are tranformed (by our senses) into the information available for us to analyze (after we have constructed our mental model of reality). There are certain conclusions we can predict immediately from this step. 1) The subsets themselves must be finite. The information available to be examined by our senses cannot be infinite and still be examinable." ("Foundations of Physical Reality", Richard Stafford, Chapter 1, Part IV -- The Solution, 2000).

So, here you say that the information available to be examined by our senses cannot be infinite. Therefore, the reason that the forum stopped (at least a theoretical reason) is that we reached the finite end of the 'information' that can be examined. But, apparently we did not reach this theoretical 'dead end' so I guess my point is mute.

Warm regards, Harv

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2024 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins