[time 203] Observation

Stephen P. King (stephenk1@home.com)
Sat, 10 Apr 1999 10:23:07 -0400

Dear Hitoshi,

        I have been reading the conversation with Ben with earnest. I am still
wondering if the difficulty of
the background radiation would be resolved by looking at the statistical
aspects of LS interactions, not as an abstraction, but as how individual
LSs observe other LS while ranging over the set Q. There is still the
possibility of using Weyl's ideas here. My concern lies in how we
resolve the "Obler's paradox" within Local System

[time 202]
>"You might be right as concerns the background radiation. And my theory could
>explain it because the theory admits to see the universe as rather a classical
>one with some value q=q1 belonging to Q (but not completely classical). The
>problem here is why one adopts that value q1 (or decomposition of the
>universe) when one observes the universe by their astronomical apparatus. Or it
>might be rephrased: why do physicists take the same value q1 when they consider
>and argue the universe? There is no inevitability for them to take that value
>q1: When you see the universe as a mind, you take the value q={ U }, where U is
>the universe system (with, maybe, some abuse of the terminology "q"), while when
>you argue Big Bang, you take the value q1. The same person can take two
>different values of q, q={ U } and q=q1, when arguing the same universe. This
>indicates that the problem of the observation of the universe should be
>formulated as follows:
>What does the universe looks, at the observer, when he takes a particular value of
>q in his consideration of the universe?
> To put it in another way,
>What one finds in the universe depends on the way he decomposes the universe.

        Are these decompositions unique?

Onward to the Unknown,


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sun Oct 17 1999 - 22:31:51 JST