Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!helios!n025fc From: n025fc@tamuts.tamu.edu (Kevin Weller) Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy Subject: Re: Emergent properties (was: What AI is exactly) Message-ID: Date: 8 Oct 90 03:28:54 GMT References: <8581@helios.TAMU.EDU> <1990Oct1.002909.21899@eng.umd.edu> <8746@helios.TAMU.EDU> <1990Oct4.045104.24620@eng.umd.edu> Sender: usenet@helios.TAMU.EDU Distribution: comp.ai.philosophy Organization: /tamu/Au/n025fc/.organization Lines: 29 In-reply-to: smeagol@eng.umd.edu's message of 4 Oct 90 04:51:04 GMT In article <1990Oct4.045104.24620@eng.umd.edu> smeagol@eng.umd.edu (Kenneth A. Hennacy) writes: Also, some thoughts are not sequential, and so using a sequential channel of communication can introduce misleading notions. As an example, I refer you to the notion that the universe is actually 1 particle. This requires you to abandon the notion of simultaneous occurances. However, many of our theories, (relativity), perturbation calculations in quantum field theories, etc. require such notions. Ken Hennacy My knowledge of relativity theory is pretty good (much better than that of quantum mechanics & friends). By my understanding, relativity is the very theory that demolishes the simultaneity idea. Observers in two different frames of reference can observe the passing of two events at different times when they would have observed the same events as simultaneous if their frames of reference were in sync (at rest with respect to one another). Simultaneity is a practical convenience only, like Newtonian physics for low relative speeds. I don't know about the other theories you mention. If they actually *require* literally simultaneous occurences, then they may be in conflict with relativity theory. The quantum bootstrapping hypothesis I used as my example is but one of many modern attempts to explain the weirdnesses of quantum events. There are many others, and holistic themes are common among them. -- Kev