About hot coffee getting colder in a cold room:

This analogy is too simplistic to be taken seriously.

potentially when a new category "bumps into" (that is: it "counts") another category (a "hot space") you get the possibility of a specified intersection of the categories (just as the word category "car" bumps into the word category "vehicle" and they partially specify each other).

Stop reasoning using analogy, especially overly simplistic analogies. They are trite.

If you add extra categories; an overall variety of three-four groups can be seen to
interact emitting and absorbing comparisons (photons). The structure of quantum electrodynamics and so on seems to be implied.

Before you compare coffee cups to QED, please state what area in physics your Ph.D. is in. It should be in particle physics to make your case.

Alan, if you want to present a philosophical theory that you think arrives at physics, then construct your argument as follows:

P1 Logical relations exist
P2 Mathematical relations exist
D3 'Counting' means indexing from 1 to n
.
.
.
Cx Entropy is optional

No more analogies please.

• Thank you Harv I figured out something! - dolphin - August 8, 2003 - 10:16 UTC
  • No way - harvey1 - August 8, 2003 - 11:37 UTC
    • Your format! - dolphin - August 8, 2003 - 12:04 UTC
      • Alan - harvey1 - August 8, 2003 - 13:59 UTC
        • Need to check a text book Harv! - dolphin - August 13, 2003 - 09:09 UTC
    • Alan- you can talk to me - yanniru - August 8, 2003 - 12:19 UTC
      • That's all fine and good - harvey1 - August 8, 2003 - 13:58 UTC