Re: physics

From: Dace (
Date: Fri 06 Dec 2002 - 06:06:12 GMT

  • Next message: Jeremy Bradley: "Re: 1905 Aliens Act"

    > From: Wade Smith <>
    > On Wednesday, December 4, 2002, at 01:41 PM, Dace wrote:
    > > [Derek]
    > > agreed with me that we can't simply discount, a priori, the
    > > possibility of
    > > action-at-a-distance applying to biology as well as physics.
    > Not much to disagree with there, I suppose, as 'simply
    > discounting' anything is, in most cases, errantly assumptive.
    > But, is not 'action-at-a-distance' still only a figment of some physics?
    > - - Wade, who is not a physicist but does seem to recall some
    > Bohr-ing comments about this somewhere.

    Action-at-a-distance has been a mainstay of physics for 300 years. Newton didn't much like the idea, but he couldn't think of any other way of accounting for gravity. No one much liked Faraday's notion of electromagnetism, since it also required action-at-a-distance, but once Maxwell proved it mathematically, it was universally accepted, so to speak. Early in the 20th century the Michelson-Morley experiment exposed the concept of "ether" as unscientific. The revelation that there's no material medium on which waves of light propagate across the cosmos led directly to Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity.


    =============================================================== This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing) see:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri 06 Dec 2002 - 06:06:49 GMT