I think he was just saying that point events do not exist. On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 6:23 PM, Stephen P. King <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Folks, > > I started reading the new Maudlin paper "Time and the Geometry of the > Universe". I got it and started reading. I stopped dead when I read the > following: > > "Empirical considerations cannot establish the existence of such point > events, but the geometrical tools discussed herein presuppose them. It would > be pleasant to construct mathematical tools of geometrical analysis that do > not rest on this presupposition, but that is work for another time." > > So what is the point of this paper? The author explicitly jettisons > empirical considerations. How is there any hope for falsification of > anything in it? I will continue reading but I am sad. :_( > > AH! Maybe this remark only applies to the discussion of Newtonian > Time.... > > -- > Onward! > > Stephen > > http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/Outlaw.html > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. >
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
