barrington interview

Robert Pirkola · 13 Oct 2014, 21:32 · from 2014-October.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: rpirkola at hotmail.com (Robert Pirkola)
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 21:32:02 +0000
Subject: (urth)  barrington interview
Message-ID: <BAY172-W2271D741D5933F1A8732ABDFAC0 at phx.gbl>

Math is universal in the same way that the physics of our
universe (which is based in observations describable mathematically)is
universal.  In other words, math and
physics apply in every corner of the universe just as they do in our tiny
corner.  If one were to make the
conjecture that some area of the observable universe did not abide by the
strictures of physical law or mathematicallogic then one would have to explain
(1) how they made this observation, (2) how one could confirm the observation withoutresorting to the use of mathematics and (3) how it is that one part of the universe
could be exempt from laws and principles that,I think we can all agree apply in
great swathes of the universe, while not directly influencing those areas at
the immediate border between the regions. 
Part of the problem appears to be that some will invoke different
periods of *time* as possibly not beholden to mathematical/physical
universality.  However, this is
fallacious because mathematics requires a universe that is at least partially divided and not uniform.  Pre-Big Bang,
the universe was undifferentiated at best and wholly unknowable at worst.  Only after the singularity became less than infinitely
dense (which is a fancy way of saying the universe became more than Nothing) does mathematics/physics as a tool have anything to ?wrench on? so to speak.  This is because they are tools only useful
when there *is* interaction.  Likewise
the heat-death scenario our ever-expanding universe seems hell-bent on
achieving will create a universe of no interaction (and thus physics or mathematics
will be rendered useless by the conditions then pertaining).  Which is not to saythat mathematics/physics
will not be able to point out the very fact of their uselessness in the extreme
edges of the universe?s temporal spectrum. 
What?s more, individualized areas of the universe where
mathematics/physics break down (black holes, perhaps other phenomena), do not
require that we abandon their universality, but merely acknowledge that black
holes for example at some point cease to provide nuts and bolts in our universe.  (Beyond the event horizon we can still ?observe?
things by referencing Hawking radiation but at some point, our lights go dark).

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20141013/9b901321/attachment.htm>

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net