Georgina Woodward
Georgina,
I know you think you are being helpful, but “what quantumc [sic] physics says and how the world is described by Relatrivity [sic]” can’t be reconciled and explained in terms of your homespun sock analogy, or your homespun black cat analogy, or any other of your homespun analogies.
Pausing to correct your spelling, grammar and punctuation would be a good start; and pausing to think before you post your dribs-and-drabs, stream-of-consciousness comments would be a good start. I know you think you are being helpful.
………………
I’m contending that the issues of matter and time, and consciousness/ observers etc. are secondary aspects of the world that should perhaps be seen in the context of the bigger-picture, primary aspect of the world, the bigger-picture, primary aspect of the world being that the world is a genuinely self-contained and standalone system.
I.e., there is nothing outside of the world manipulating the world. Of necessity, the world is a type of thing that created its own relationships, categories and numbers; these are the aspects of the world that physicists represent with special symbols; and the category aspects of the world can be measured by physicists. Of necessity, the world is a type of thing that internally moves itself.
I’m contending that, because the world is a self-contained, standalone internally-moving viable system, these necessary foundational aspects of the world can be implied from what we know about viable systems:
- A point-of-view aspect of the world, which needs to come from small parts of the world, and
- A creative aspect of the world whereby, in order to resolve situations, the small parts of the world need to continually, and on the spot, create new numbers and apply them to the categories, and
- A knowledge aspect of the world whereby the small parts of the world need to know their own relationships, categories and numbers.