"Borcis" wrote in message
...

Kevin A. Scaldeferri wrote:

At least in it's weak form, as I usually think of it, the anthropic
principle is tautologous. All it says it that there exists a data
point, which is that we exist, and that nature must be consistent with
this.

There are various stronger formulations, but they are all philosophy
or religion.

A point is that the "data point" is actually a rich piece of data
- arguably infinitely rich - and that whatever theory of nature we
want to constrain from it, selects a particular abstraction out of
it. Opportunistically using AP as a last resort for theories we don't
manage to complete to our liking without it, leads us to an uncontrolled
sample of such abstractions; -if- we admit it has a place (over the one
you point out, of an eg redundant tautology) for better balance shouldn't
we
try to contemplate for itself, the space of abstractions of the fact that
we
exist, that may plausibly constrain some (unbound variable) theory of
observable nature ?

It seems to me that if people use the AP for a placeholding crutch to tie
things somewhat together on an initial, provisional basis, and then, as you
say, "contemplate for itself, the space of abstractions of the fact that we
exist", then one thing that arises is the consideration that the abstract
notions, symbols and expressions undoubtedly are -- I guess the proper word
is -- contrived, secondary to the physical thing itself. That is, the
abstracted symbols and imagery, while introducing extra "store-hold-and
retrieve" morphisms during our shuttling and communication processes also
surely do emerge from the energized actions of the physical thing itself.
This leads to the question of whether a more synchronous, non-abstract
symbolism can be developed which conveys more understanding of nature faster
and better than ANY of the abstractly formulated approximations.

This view is NOT accessible except when the circle of knowledge is closed
in some way, if only in a crude and uncomely manner. AP may be messy and
in conflict with modern pharisaical rules and desires, but, lacking
alternatives, it does appear
to have one advantage: it works and people rely upon it while continuing
to look for an improvement.

Oddly enough, once seen, the alternate ~analog~ approach is reminiscent to
one of Bohr's long- sought complementary expressions, even if if it must be
scribbled out only in some alien, Faraday-like symbols.

Let me guess, though. Theorists who believe abstract math symbols and
expressions are primary are not warm to the notion of switching to any
different symbols and expressions.


--
Ralph Frost
Imagine a single internal analog language
made of ordered water...
and its variants.
http://flep.refrost.com

"Ralph E. Frost" wrote in message ...
"Borcis" wrote in message
...

Ralph,

Imagine a single internal analog language
made of ordered water...
and its variants.

Order is a function of perspective. It's subjective.

A universal state is the absolute. It's the basis out of which form
rises.

To the extent we seek the universal, we return to the base, rather
then attain a higher state. Consider religious extremism

The problem with our eternally fruitless search for the meaning of
life is that meaning is a reductionistic and static concept, while
life is dynamic and wholistic.

The purpose is to have purpose, without which you die.

"Ralph E. Frost" wrote in message ...
This leads to the question of whether a more synchronous, non-abstract
symbolism can be developed which conveys more understanding of nature faster
and better than ANY of the abstractly formulated approximations.


Like when the Zen master whacks pupil over head with sandal?

brodix wrote:

The purpose is to have purpose, without which you die.


No, the purpose is mass equilibrium, and then you die.

Anthropic Principle and Intelligent Design
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=is...ial.net&rnum=3

Our Anthropic Universe
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=is...ial.net&rnum=4
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=is...ial.net&rnum=6

Anthropic Principle
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...ews.com#link53

Anthropic Principle
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...ews.com#link54

Anthropi Principle
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...ews.com#link55

Theory of Everything
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...l. net#link21

Theory of Everything
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...l. net#link22

island,


Equilibrium is a parameter, not a goal.

http://groups.google.com/groups?dq=&...%26start%3D175

brodix wrote:

island,


Equilibrium is a parameter, not a goal.

Fraid not, although Boltzmann might at least sympathize with your
approach. Einstein's was better.

island wrote in message ...
brodix wrote:

island,


Equilibrium is a parameter, not a goal.

Fraid not, although Boltzmann might at least sympathize with your
approach. Einstein's was better.

And Einstein thought gravity would collapse the universe to a point,
so he had to add the cosmological constant.

As gravity collapses mass it radiates the constituent energy.

Matter collapses, energy expands.

Since we accept gravity as contracting space, why isn't radiation
expanding space?

regards,

brodix

brodix wrote:

island wrote in message ...
brodix wrote:

Equilibrium is a parameter, not a goal.

Fraid not, although Boltzmann might at least sympathize with your
approach. Einstein's was better.

And Einstein thought gravity would collapse the universe to a point,
so he had to add the cosmological constant.

As gravity collapses mass it radiates the constituent energy.

Matter collapses, energy expands.

Since we accept gravity as contracting space, why isn't radiation
expanding space?


It is, at least, on the high-energy end of things, anyway, but certainly
not the way that you think. Had you read the post that's attatched to
the first link that worked, then you would have discovered the answer
without having to ask the question.

The first link broke up, but the second one repeated itself, and it
pretty much outlines the whole story...

....stay-tuned for the details...

island,

I did skim it, but.....

...stay-tuned for the details...

brodix wrote:

island,

I did skim it, but.....

...stay-tuned for the details

uh huh... willful ignorance spells personal motivation

Have a nice fantasy...

bye bye