Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site cvl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!cvl!rlh
From: rlh@cvl.UUCP (Ralph L. Hartley)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: RE: Continuity
Message-ID: <306@cvl.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 15-Apr-85 15:23:57 EST
Article-I.D.: cvl.306
Posted: Mon Apr 15 15:23:57 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 21-Apr-85 03:02:39 EST
Organization: Computer Vision Lab, U. of Maryland, College Park
Lines: 28


> 	The continuous model of the universe is the most relevent 
> one. Physics are unable to resolve any sort of bottom most 
> primitive particle. For all intents and purposes, the continuous 
> model of the universe is the most accurate.

Learn some physics sometime. Physicsts have indeed found several such
particles. For example no one has ever found any internal structure in
an electron.

>	If you are implying that there is an essentially random 
> element to the universe, that is a model that Einstein himself 
> refuted.
>
>	" I find it very difficult to believe that God plays
> dice " - Einstein ( loosely quoted )

Einstein did find it very difficult to believe, but he never refuted
it. In fact some of his own work (on the photo-electric effect) gave direct
support to the theory that he opposed. Einstien was one of the last of
the old groop of pysicists who never accepted Quantum Mechanics even as
massive amounts of evidence for it appeared.

> It is generally agreed that the uncertainties encountered in 
> experimentation are due to observational difficulties. This was 
> the point I wished to emphasize.