Quote:
|
Originally Posted by James Putnam
It sometimes includes using misleading steps. But, the misleading step may be necessary to make an intermediate point when enough is not yet known to properly make the point.
|
No problem in that. In math and science it is a standard convention in proofs assume that a given is false in order to show a contradiction. You denigrate your own argument by calling it misleading.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by James Putnam
{Buffy saying definition of direction seems fuzzy} I think it is a bit fuzzy. I am assuming it will necessarily remain fuzzy. That is because until we agree on a nature for the universe, the direction itself remains debatable....It seems clear to me that the universe has direction, but I need for others to agree for good reasons so that I may proceed.
|
That makes it very hard to gain agreement that any of the 5 items you've listed "show direction" in the universe. I think based on the statements in my previous post that I have concluded that the universe does not necessarily have "direction" beyond the notion of time and that increasing entropy is only a consequence since it is defined in terms of time. I think we all might agree that we leave the reversibility of time alone for now, but realize that its directionality is actually still an open issue.
To try to help you along, here are some definitions I could propose. I'll use mathematical definitions since you seem to be comfortable with that:
1) Direction is a value that increases monotonically
2) Direction is a vector that indicates a stable end point in an n-space (that is, there could be changes in the position of the element described by the vector over time, but the sum of all these changes is a constant).
3) Direction is a vector that indicates a range of values of an n-1-space in an n-space (that is, the overall direction and end point of the vector changes over time)
My previous post basically argues that all of the 5 items you mention can be reversed under a variety of conditions--that is they do not behave monotonically--and of the 5, only entropy actually shows a consistent vector, whereas the others are constantly in flux as the interact with other matter in the universe. So time for me seems to be the only thing that is "always moving forward."
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by James Putnam
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Buffy
Thus entropy in and of itself cannot be used effectively to argue that life and intelligence cannot evolve.
|
I wouldn't try that line of argument. If I understand your point correctly, you are implying that argument might be used by someone who wished to justify crediting the evolution of life to a miracle. |
Not at all. Its just been clear that your thesis does include the notion that life and intelligence did not evolve and that it has existed unchanged since the beginning of the Universe. I was responding to your bringing entropy into your list, by making the point that while entropy may show direction in some way (and I argue here that entropy's "direction" is only a consequence of the supposed directionality of time), it does not preclude life and intelligence evolving from "mechanical" properties. But I am jumping ahead, so we'll leave that one out for now, just keep the notion in mind as you move forward.
Cheers,
Buffy
