Fri, 3 Sep 1999 22:59:01 EDT
In a message dated 9/3/99 12:34:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> Hi Bill,
> Thanks for the reference. I really appreciate Kevin Brown's work and
> thinking! BTW, what do you make of my duality idea? (I just found out
> that Frieden supports duality! See: Frieden, B. R. & Soffer, B. H.
> Physics Review E, 52, 2274- (1995))
> Is there any connection between the infinite products and the "logistic
> map"? (See:
> http://www.wiwi.uni-bielefeld.de/~boehm/members/klaus/logistic/) The
> "1/(1-x)" term is key component.
Restate your duality theory, in 100 words or less,
then I will comment. :-] The paper is over 1 mB zipped; thanks
for figuring out what I'll be doing for the future. And that is
exactly the point I'm trying to make about 1/(1 - x). You may
think it is contrary to common sense when I propose that
NOW is NOT "pushed" from the PAST by a PAST operator,
but that the PAST was attracted to all possible NOW's by
an operator that only becomes evaluated in the NOW.
Another way of saying this is that NOW is attracted to
all FUTUREs by an operator to be measured in the FUTURE.
My disclaimer is that this state of affairs is due a subjective
limitation of the observer and by "psychophysical parallelism",
all objects are observers. And, that the underlying objective
structure has been programmed to subjectively mimic an
attraction to the FUTURE by objectively requiring every
augmentation of state in a given world to be accompanied by
related augmentations in a majority of other worlds. That is,
( 1 + x ) objectively in multiplicity leads to a subjective
reality where the FUTURE seems to attract the PRESENT.
My infinite products are simply candidates for role of the
objective multiplicity that subjectively offers the seemingly
non-intuitive conclusions drawn above.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Oct 16 1999 - 00:36:39 JST