Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: garjog

“Not sure what you mean by this one. Can you Explain?”

Sure—one of the most basic assumptions of science is the repeatability of experiments over time.

If Experiment A works in Time A and Time B, it is assumed that if you run that same experiment in Time C it will work as well.

Time is therefore treated as background that will have no impact on the experiment—it is a featureless dimension with no properties of its own.

Most folks have not even attempted to deal with this assumption.

One of the few who made the effort was Terence McKenna—while his predictions for the future turned out to be incorrect (he predicted a/the singularity for 2012) he gave an example of how one could approach the issue.

He argued that time was represented by periods of stability and periods of novelty, and argued that the periods of novelty were increasing over time.

Under such a theory the time period when the experiment was conducted would affect the result.

During periods of “high novelty” the experiment would probably fail to reproduce earlier results.


119 posted on 12/25/2021 11:35:25 AM PST by cgbg (A kleptocracy--if they can keep it. Think of it as the Cantillon Effect in action.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies ]


To: cgbg

“time was represented by periods of stability and periods of novelty”

Wow. I will have to read up on “time is not necessarily featureless”.

Trying to imagine what a physically novel time period would look like.

Sounds like an idea in That Hideous Strength, a novel by CS Lewis, that time and matter evolve.


120 posted on 12/27/2021 9:34:41 AM PST by garjog ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson