Replying to LO29467 --
> Andrew Campbell < ACampnona@aol.com > quoted Beamish:
> >Time, the most elusive of physical quantities, is NOT, as its
> >history would indicate, best described by the well known
> >"Arrow of Time" (an "arrow" which travels from past to future).
> >Similar to temperature, time has magnitude only (a distinct
> >property of a "scalar quantity"). TIME HAS NO DIRECTION
> >(no north, no south, no up, no down). Therefore one could not
> >possibly "shoot" an arrow of time as no target exists which could
> >be struck by such an arrow! We must search for a more suitable
> Andrew, when Eddington wrote about the "arrow of time", he was referring
> to LEP (Law of Entropy Production) as time's arrow. By that he meant
> except for time which has to increase from the past to the future, there
> is only one other thing which does the same, namely the entropy of the
> universe. Thus he connected the two with each other.
Andrew, At - how is it possible that we are so ignorant that we often
describe Time as a physical quantity?
How can a physical quantity be the bridge between the physical and the
abstract? I believe it is very important that LEP is described as the "the
arrow of time" and not Time itself. LEP is merely the becoming thereoff.
Is time not a being - becoming pair amongst other things? What will for
e.g. happen to liveness if Time does not have an arrow. Caught in a
"unescapable" equilibrium..... or maybe we should wait until somebody
incorporate LEP into the Theory of General Relativity ..... or maybe my
imagination is out of hand....or maybe I am just ignorant.....
Gravity: the curvature of "Entropic"/Space caused by the presence of
I am getting carried away.
Alfred Rheeder <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.