**Ben Goertzel** (*ben@goertzel.org*)

*Sat, 10 Apr 1999 22:09:28 -0400*

**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]**Next message:**Hitoshi Kitada: "[time 215] Re: [time 211] How to define length using LSs"**Previous message:**Hitoshi Kitada: "[time 213] Re: [time 210] Re: [time 209] Observation & Obler's Paradox"**In reply to:**Stephen P. King: "[time 203] Observation"

*>I found by your response that the "intimacy parameter" q does not range over
*

*>the
*

*>interval [0,1], but over the set
*

*>
*

*>Q={b | b is a decomposition of L into disjoint subsets of L},
*

*>
*

*>in the observation of a local system L={1,2,...,N}. Namely Q is the set of
*

*>cluster decompositions b of L.
*

Excellent! This makes a lot more sense...

The real number q we were talking about before is a kind of derived parameter,

definable perhaps as

1 - (#cluster elements)/(#particles in observed system)

*>As we saw above, the basic formulation is already in time_IV.tex.
*

I need to read that paper more carefully now

If we could

*>proceed to a new area, as you say below we need to clarify the strong forces
*

*>and
*

*>quarks. Maybe I need to study them...
*

The first step is QED, quantum electrodynamics, i.e. special relativistic

quantum theory.

Or do you feel you've completely solved this already?

Then the weak interaction... and then quarks, last. I think.

*>> So q=.5 means you take the average of the two reference frames?
*

*>
*

*>As revised above, the value q=.5 is not realistic.
*

No,I see now that it corresponds to grouping the N particles in the

observed system into, say,

N/2 groups of 2 particles each...

*>I have to begin with studying strong and other forces if I try to incorporate
*

*>those forces into my context. I.e. I need references. Could you or anyone list
*

*>up the papers that seem to be appropriate to begin the study?
*

I will get the best references from a physicist friend of mine

ben

**Next message:**Hitoshi Kitada: "[time 215] Re: [time 211] How to define length using LSs"**Previous message:**Hitoshi Kitada: "[time 213] Re: [time 210] Re: [time 209] Observation & Obler's Paradox"**In reply to:**Stephen P. King: "[time 203] Observation"

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