[deleted]
Dear Hans-Thomas Elze,
Thank you very much for your expert reply. My point was, the present time has strictly speaking no extension if it is not a slice but a Euclidean point sliding along a steadily growing Peirce-continuum .
I will check the hints you gave. Unfortunately I did not find the word extensity in my dictionary. Could you please translate it into German?
What about extensionality (in the sense of Bestimmtheit), I referred to the first axiom of set theory in my essay.
Let me briefly indicate the point of my somewhat hidden objection to Schulman's vote for the frontier in physics:
I am arguing that the a quantity in the past can have two quite different meanings:
It can either refer to the reality that utters itself as an unspecified manifold of traces, for instance the undeniable wrinkles to be seen in my face, or to a finite set copied or otherwise abstracted from it. The latter can be manipulated at will.
Future values of a quantity are always without a real background and therefore of finite quality. In other words there is not yet any real future. The future is partially uncertain because the extension of all influences is infinite while all models, records, or the like cannot consider all possible influences.
Laymen tend to understand this distinction between reality on the one side and prediction or plan on the other side better than physicists who still adhere Einsteins belief that the separation into past and future is merely an albeit obstinate illusion.
Just in order to indicate some consequences of this distinction: I am objecting to the absurd T-symmetry that allegedly only belongs to the wave function.
Best regards,
Eckard Blumschein