uwot wrote: ↑Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:11 pm
Here's the latest: http://willijbouwman.blogspot.lu/2017/10/blog-post.html
I'm still fiddling about with resolution issues, so publication is some time after that's all sorted. Anyway, lots of improvements, particularly in the quantum mechanics/field theory bit-what are particles and why are they so different to proper stuff? Easy-peasy.
I've always liked the oooh how big demos.
I do not think "Where did the universe come from?" is a question.
Hobbes' Choice wrote: ↑Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:48 pmI've always liked the oooh how big demos.
I think we are lucky to have some sense of scale.
Hobbes' Choice wrote: ↑Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:48 pmII do not think "Where did the universe come from?" is a question.
Well yeah, if there's no 'Where?'; 'from' is meaningless. 'What?' is no better. In the context of the book, I don't really want to get into that sort of semantic subtlety; it's hard enough making the distinction between physics, mathematics and philosophy clear. Point taken, but I believe that most of the target readership will take it as a legitimate question.
Hobbes' Choice wrote: ↑Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:48 pmI've always liked the oooh how big demos.
I think we are lucky to have some sense of scale.
Hobbes' Choice wrote: ↑Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:48 pmII do not think "Where did the universe come from?" is a question.
Well yeah, if there's no 'Where?'; 'from' is meaningless. 'What?' is no better. In the context of the book, I don't really want to get into that sort of semantic subtlety; it's hard enough making the distinction between physics, mathematics and philosophy clear. Point taken, but I believe that most of the target readership will take it as a legitimate question.
By definition the universe is everywhere, so there is no other where from where it can come from. If there was nothing you'd have nothing to say.
How would the target readership understand the question?
Hobbes' Choice wrote: ↑Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:52 pmBy definition the universe is everywhere, so there is no other where from where it can come from. If there was nothing you'd have nothing to say.
How much undergraduate semantics, epistemology and metaphysics do you wish to teach me?
Hobbes' Choice wrote: ↑Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:52 pmHow would the target readership understand the question?
At face value. It may be clumsily stated, but in its raw state, it is not a complicated question.
Hobbes' Choice wrote: ↑Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:52 pmBy definition the universe is everywhere, so there is no other where from where it can come from. If there was nothing you'd have nothing to say.
How much undergraduate semantics, epistemology and metaphysics do you wish to teach me?
Hobbes' Choice wrote: ↑Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:52 pmHow would the target readership understand the question?
At face value. It may be clumsily stated, but in its raw state, it is not a complicated question.
This does not relate to epistemology or metaphysics, only semantics.
Universe is about place. It is all the place that there is and no other place, by definition.
Hobbes' Choice wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2017 11:04 amThis does not relate to epistemology or metaphysics, only semantics.
Universe is about place. It is all the place that there is and no other place, by definition.
Well, if you go all scholastic, and insist on definitions, then yeah. But for most purposes, 'the universe' refers to the visible universe, or at least everything within our visual range. We cannot know all the place that there is, for which reason it is metaphysical; by definition, if you like.
Hobbes' Choice wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2017 11:04 amThis does not relate to epistemology or metaphysics, only semantics.
Universe is about place. It is all the place that there is and no other place, by definition.
Well, if you go all scholastic, and insist on definitions, then yeah. But for most purposes, 'the universe' refers to the visible universe, or at least everything within our visual range. We cannot know all the place that there is, for which reason it is metaphysical; by definition, if you like.
It's not scholastic, its not even very clever. Its just a no brainer. It's like asking who made water wet.
What sort of a fruit is T-Bone steak.
Asking where did the universe come from?
Hobbes' Choice wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2017 11:12 pmIt's not scholastic, its not even very clever.
Well yeah, but if you don't ask the questions, you never find out how unclever they are. Anyway, Christmas is sorted; my book is now available from Amazon https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1521884722
Hobbes' Choice wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2017 11:12 pmIt's not scholastic, its not even very clever.
Well yeah, but if you don't ask the questions, you never find out how unclever they are. Anyway, Christmas is sorted; my book is now available from Amazon https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1521884722
Well, congratulations on your publication, and well done for all the effort.
Hobbes' Choice wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2017 11:04 amThis does not relate to epistemology or metaphysics, only semantics.
Universe is about place. It is all the place that there is and no other place, by definition.
Well, if you go all scholastic, and insist on definitions, then yeah. But for most purposes, 'the universe' refers to the visible universe, or at least everything within our visual range.
WHY would the 'Universe' be limited to only what human beings see?
uwot wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2017 9:53 pmWe cannot know all the place that there is, for which reason it is metaphysical; by definition, if you like.
WHY should 'All the place that there is' be limited only what human beings can visibly see?
Does any one else see the funny side of how the Universe seems to be expanding at about the same rate as the ability of human beings are able to see further, which coincidentally corresponds along with the advancement of the ability of telescopes to see further afield?
Universe should simply be defined as ALL THERE IS for that is not limited to human knowledge
or understanding but includes that which is beyond human knowledge or understanding as well
surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2017 6:23 pm
Universe should simply be defined as ALL THERE IS for that is not limited to human knowledge
or understanding but includes that which is beyond human knowledge or understanding as well
That's a fair definition of universe. The thing is, in very general terms, talking about the stuff we can see is physics. As such, it is subject to observation, experiment and analysis. Blabbing on about stuff we can't see is philosophy, or worse, religion, and that can be any old nonsense that pleases you.
I deal with all that in my book, a bargain at $12.50 (roughly 10 quid or Euros) from https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1521884722
(Apologies to Hexhammer.)