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
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Math-space

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Alan on December 24, 2003 03:29:26 UTC

Thank you very much Yanniru. This requires a more considered response; I need to type away from the money-drain of internet cafe; then post.

Brief thought at this stage:

The structure I describe re: Leibnitz pi is given as a "hollow" structure of potential paths of communication. It is consistent say with Lee Smolin's idea of space as "channels of communication".

But once you quantify an actual contribution; such as in your interesting description of corporate decision-making processes, what happens to the "structure of potential information exchanges" that Leibnitz pi seems to say describe?

The entire structure is not affected by content. There is no reducing contributions in it as it does not occupy a rigid mathematical space.

Any quantifying of a contribution size does not affect the information-exchange potential (except through the law of non-contradiction).

Example:

If you define someone's contribution to a debate as n-units; this does not prevent all other parties to the debate from re-considering all points of view taking the n-units particular view into consideration.

Any apparent bias of the debate due to a particular quantified contribution would require a hijacking of the debate-space by that one contribution? To use numbers to count a particular contribution's scale is to define a rigid mathematics built around that contribution.

But the Leibnitz-pi space is not restricted to rigid geometries imposed by participants; only by agreement between participants could a "transparent" (that is: non-compulsory, built from free agreement) conservation-geometry be constructed.

Regards,

Alan

Follow Ups:

    Login to Post
    Additional Information
    Google
     
    Web www.astronomy.net
    DayNightLine
    About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
    Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2022 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