For the discussion of all things philosophical, especially articles in the magazine Philosophy Now.
https://forum.philosophynow.org/
Hi uwot,uwot wrote: ↑Mon Jun 26, 2017 12:03 pm I'm working on the front cover. This is the latest draft which will be published shortly. Any last minute suggestions will be gratefully received. (The quality is much better in PDF, but hopefully, you get the idea.)
Cheers
Will
http://willijbouwman.blogspot.co.uk
Thanks seeds. Someone else pointed that out, so it's clearly a problem. Is it clearer if I italicise it: "The simplest explanation for all the evidence that suggests that the universe is made of some stuff, is that the universe is made of some stuff"? If not, I will need to rewrite that bit.
Yes, that now makes your intent much clearer.uwot wrote: ↑Tue Jun 27, 2017 8:04 amThanks seeds. Someone else pointed that out, so it's clearly a problem. Is it clearer if I italicise it: "The simplest explanation for all the evidence that suggests that the universe is made of some stuff, is that the universe is made of some stuff"? If not, I will need to rewrite that bit.
You could be on to something.
Space is either empty or it has stuff in it. A section of space, at any rate. Or it contains some stuff, along with some emptiness.
Depends what you mean by 'space'. If you mean that space=void, as in empty space, then you are presented with two possibilities. Either there are voids in which electromagnetic and gravitational fields have no influence, or you have to accept that such fields work by "spooky action at a distance", to quote Einstein.
Quantum field theories, QED, QCD and Higgs, for example, assume that 'fields' are in some sense 'stuff', and that matter and energy are disturbances in those fields.
Not of EM and gravitational fields, as far as we know.
-1- wrote: ↑Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:42 amSpace is either empty or it has stuff in it. A section of space, at any rate. Or it contains some stuff, along with some emptiness.
Matter always contains stuff.
And what is stuff? At the end of the day it can only be space folding upon itself.
You can find space that is empty, you can find space that contains stuff, but matter always contains stuff. Matter is never empty.
Call this rational if you can find the rationale for it.
uwot wrote: ↑Wed Jan 10, 2018 4:42 pmDepends what you mean by 'space'. If you mean that space=void, as in empty space,
The terms "empty" and "space" also implies that space acts simultaneously as a boundary as empty implies a deficiency. We can observe this in 1 and -1. 1 exists on its own terms, while is strictly a relative deficiency of 1 and not a thing in itself. It can be observed if and only if their is 1.
What we understand of as "empty" is merely a spatial dimension that is deficient of another spatial dimension, with "empty" merely being an observation of the relations between spatial dimensions.
then you are presented with two possibilities. Either there are voids in which electromagnetic and gravitational fields have no influence, or you have to accept that such fields work by "spooky action at a distance", to quote Einstein.
Space is merely "direction" as what we understand of space, through dimensions, breaks down to the direction of space relative to other spatial directions. We can observe this in the linear foundations, or measurements, we use to observe space. Space is the observation of direction as dimension, with extradimensional linear relations being the foundation of much of what we know. However "extra"dimensionality is what defines space as direction.
In a seperate respect, 0d space, is merely an observe of 1d space as we cannot see 0d space for itself. It still maintains a dual nature, through 1d space as
1) the point (1d line between 0d points)
2) and the field (1d line between 0d points as an extension of the very same 0d points acting as a field. Or a 1d line extending into a 0d point ad-infinitum causes the 0d point to act simultaneously as a field considering only the line exists._
Quantum field theories, QED, QCD and Higgs, for example, assume that 'fields' are in some sense 'stuff', and that matter and energy are disturbances in those fields.
And if there are multiple fields, that relate to eachother, how does their behavior differ than that of particulate?
Not of EM and gravitational fields, as far as we know.
Space is "being", in simple terms.