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
Thank You Yanniru

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Alan on October 4, 2003 06:04:31 UTC

Thank you Yanniru.

On re-reading my material I actually am struggling to figure out how it supposedly "solved QED".

However there remains the question of whether the reasoning in QED is circular. Probability is circular? Example: "One chance in 6 of getting a 6 when tossing a dice": is another way of saying "define a dice as 1 in 6"?

Strictly, what given that everything is different (to exist is to be different, so the "next" toss of the dice involves .... a new dice say): perhaps here we see why self-referential exchanges in definition might be useful to project the constancy that we assume physics plays against?

The idea of "precession" ; and of two precessions mutually defining, seems involved in QED.



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 1994-2023 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