0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
I don't like that one too much, I want my universe to in-cooperate free will, and indeterminism It's so much more elegant
You can also use statistics and 'trends' to find the same. On a local level there is no way for me to know what you will do, I can only guess. But over a whole population we will see what we call trends materializing. So locally I can't define it, but over a population it becomes possible to see statistically significant trends. Locality is a nice idea.
but after we're done we both go away, thinking that "the other fella at least got it worse than me"
Well, as far as I know you can, post graphics I mean? You want a fractal reality based on spheres then?
you can take a screen shot (Prnt Scrn) of it, then change it into a 'jpeg' image, to post.
The arrow 'stopping' at Planck scale as our descriptions break down, with a simultaneous image of the universe as we normally describe it, using the speed of light in a vacuum.
Because doing so it becomes more understandable to me that something as big as a universe might fit my pocket. It's dimensions again, but from another point of view. And we do become a sorts of projection, depending on how you look at it, from that.
'Paths' as not needing end-points, is just a description of you looking for some linear connection, as causality or action and reaction, without finding it experimentally definable, although still needed theoretically.
To that you also should be able to join fractal behaviors, describing some sort of 'gestalt' that might define it.
And no, I' not sure how I will find a new degree of freedom by traveling backwards instead of forward?There are three spatial degrees of freedom, and they are always defined relative the 'observer',
As for what direction a fractal should be described as I'm unsure. Myself I think of it as self like, and able to scale.
If I define it that way, I also should be able to define a single object as 'moving' in a otherwise empty, infinite space.
Because I think we're down to two definitions here, accelerations as something locally measurable, uniform motions as equivalently 'unmoving', not locally measurable.