<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Incompatible Arrows, III:  Lewis Carroll</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/</link>
	<description>Random samplings from a universe of ideas.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 02:13:47 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Adam Stephanides</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/comment-page-1/#comment-38689</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam Stephanides</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2008 15:07:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/#comment-38689</guid>
		<description>I just came across this thread yesterday. Sean, doesn&#039;t your argument in 16 and 25 assume that the correct direction of time is already fixed? That is, the effects of the interaction propagate into the &quot;future&quot; of the system with more degrees of freedom, but not into the &quot;future&quot; of the system with fewer degrees.

Suppose two systems with opposite directions of time and equal degrees of freedom were to interact. What would happen?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just came across this thread yesterday. Sean, doesn&#8217;t your argument in 16 and 25 assume that the correct direction of time is already fixed? That is, the effects of the interaction propagate into the &#8220;future&#8221; of the system with more degrees of freedom, but not into the &#8220;future&#8221; of the system with fewer degrees.</p>
<p>Suppose two systems with opposite directions of time and equal degrees of freedom were to interact. What would happen?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Plato</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/comment-page-1/#comment-38726</link>
		<dc:creator>Plato</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 02:34:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/#comment-38726</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cut-the-knot.org/LewisCarroll/index.shtml&quot; title=&quot;Lewis Carroll&#039;s Logic Game-Alexander Bogomolny&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Lewis Carroll&#039;s Logic Game&lt;/a&gt;

&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;i&gt;Lewis Carroll&#039;s fame is universal. I can easily cite a couple dozen books that mention him or quote from his books. Temptation to quote from Alice&#039;s experiences with which so many people can identify, is indeed great. But the trend may be reversing. In the introduction to a book I have recently come across, the author found it necessary to mention that in the whole of the book there is not a single reference to either Alice in Wonderland or Through the Looking Glass - the two books that made the name of Lewis Carroll a household item the world over. However, his other works are either forgotten or known far less. In real life he was a mathematician &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Dodgson&quot; title=&quot;Lewis Carroll&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;C. L. Dodgson&lt;/a&gt; with deep interest in symbolic logic and logical reasoning. I have described elsewhere one of his probability and the doublets puzzles.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.cut-the-knot.org/LewisCarroll/index.shtml" title="Lewis Carroll's Logic Game-Alexander Bogomolny" rel="nofollow">Lewis Carroll&#8217;s Logic Game</a></p>
<blockquote><p><i>Lewis Carroll&#8217;s fame is universal. I can easily cite a couple dozen books that mention him or quote from his books. Temptation to quote from Alice&#8217;s experiences with which so many people can identify, is indeed great. But the trend may be reversing. In the introduction to a book I have recently come across, the author found it necessary to mention that in the whole of the book there is not a single reference to either Alice in Wonderland or Through the Looking Glass &#8211; the two books that made the name of Lewis Carroll a household item the world over. However, his other works are either forgotten or known far less. In real life he was a mathematician <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Dodgson" title="Lewis Carroll" rel="nofollow">C. L. Dodgson</a> with deep interest in symbolic logic and logical reasoning. I have described elsewhere one of his probability and the doublets puzzles.</i></p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Merryman</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/comment-page-1/#comment-38727</link>
		<dc:creator>John Merryman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 01:02:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/#comment-38727</guid>
		<description>testing access...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>testing access&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam S</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/comment-page-1/#comment-38686</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam S</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2008 05:41:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/#comment-38686</guid>
		<description>Towards the end of chapter VII in Through the Looking-Glass, there&#039;s another instance of time reversal (kind-of)
&#039;You don&#039;t know how to manage Looking-glass cakes,&#039; the Unicorn
remarked.  &#039;Hand it round first, and cut it afterwards.&#039;

I always figured that this was kind of like reversing parity and as a result needing to reverse time as well. (I guess the looking-glass world wasn&#039;t antimatter, or Alice wouldn&#039;t have fared so well)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Towards the end of chapter VII in Through the Looking-Glass, there&#8217;s another instance of time reversal (kind-of)<br />
&#8216;You don&#8217;t know how to manage Looking-glass cakes,&#8217; the Unicorn<br />
remarked.  &#8216;Hand it round first, and cut it afterwards.&#8217;</p>
<p>I always figured that this was kind of like reversing parity and as a result needing to reverse time as well. (I guess the looking-glass world wasn&#8217;t antimatter, or Alice wouldn&#8217;t have fared so well)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Qubit</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/comment-page-1/#comment-38687</link>
		<dc:creator>Qubit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2008 22:41:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/#comment-38687</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt; You can’t maintain interacting systems with opposed arrows of time. &lt;/blockquote&gt; Black holes can, otherwise they would not be able to evaporate. IMO Hawking radiation must escape along parrallel surface reflections, allowing it to escape unseen and able to freely interact with each arrow of time; marrying the two together so they seem like a seamless past and escaping up imaginary potentials, as the universe observes the real objects it creates.

I don’t see how they are incompatible, if they are incompatible then that’s because one is from another universe. Which does not mean you can&#039;t make them compatible; esp. if you can convince the other direction your past matches its interactions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p> You can’t maintain interacting systems with opposed arrows of time. </p></blockquote>
<p> Black holes can, otherwise they would not be able to evaporate. IMO Hawking radiation must escape along parrallel surface reflections, allowing it to escape unseen and able to freely interact with each arrow of time; marrying the two together so they seem like a seamless past and escaping up imaginary potentials, as the universe observes the real objects it creates.</p>
<p>I don’t see how they are incompatible, if they are incompatible then that’s because one is from another universe. Which does not mean you can&#8217;t make them compatible; esp. if you can convince the other direction your past matches its interactions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Merryman</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/comment-page-1/#comment-38688</link>
		<dc:creator>John Merryman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2008 16:02:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/#comment-38688</guid>
		<description>Paul,

 To the extent I consider time a measure of motion, rather than the basis for it, the concept of &quot;now&quot; as a point is meaningless. To actually freeze motion would require a temperature of absolute zero, at which point measureable reality ceases to exist, since measurement requires a degree of interconnectivity and transition, which don&#039;t exist without motion. So since the concept of a point in time can only be approximate, any measurement from or to such a point is equally approximate. To suppose otherwise, you end up with a form of Zeno&#039;s Paradox, where nothing happens, although it is obvious that much happens, as you seem to be hinting at.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Paul,</p>
<p> To the extent I consider time a measure of motion, rather than the basis for it, the concept of &#8220;now&#8221; as a point is meaningless. To actually freeze motion would require a temperature of absolute zero, at which point measureable reality ceases to exist, since measurement requires a degree of interconnectivity and transition, which don&#8217;t exist without motion. So since the concept of a point in time can only be approximate, any measurement from or to such a point is equally approximate. To suppose otherwise, you end up with a form of Zeno&#8217;s Paradox, where nothing happens, although it is obvious that much happens, as you seem to be hinting at.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Valletta</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/comment-page-1/#comment-38725</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Valletta</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2008 08:51:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/#comment-38725</guid>
		<description>John, think of a rubik cube and its many configurations, or permutations. Now, from 1 second ago, to this very moment NOW, the &quot;second&quot; has a certain value, and from NOW to 1 &quot;second&quot; into the future, this &quot;second&quot; has certain value. Are the two moments past_to_now now_to_future  &quot;seconds&quot; identical?..is the previous second compatable with the first &quot;second&quot;?

If there is no change, then there is no history, no past in time. There may be many molecular or atomic manouvering, permutations for every piece of matter in existence, but look at any single moment anywhere on Earth, and there is a vast amount of change happening, no two &quot;seconds&quot; are identical?

Although the measuring clock is identical, the fact one can go back 13 billion ly&#039;s and find a Universe that has totally changed, means that locally &quot;second_to_second&quot; time NEVER changes, or there is never any recordable evidence to such changes, but Universe_to_Universe Bang_to_Rip, then there a not only vast amount of changes, the local Laws of Physics must have changes emmbedded into every local interaction, like a &quot;new&quot; geometric rubik cube appearing with a new set of rules and regulations?

Gravity for instance has today, &quot;NOW&quot; has four signatures, there are FOUR FOURCE&#039;S ;) two of inner force (short range)we and two that can be demmed outer force (long range), these have been set sometime in the long distant past, just what changes occured to configure Gravity into this sequence, or order of sequence?

What if Gravity was a positive inner force &quot;NOW&quot;, and the strong molecular &quot;now&quot; force, relagated to the Atomic extreme?

Is there a time in the Universe, where all force&#039;s interchange locally?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John, think of a rubik cube and its many configurations, or permutations. Now, from 1 second ago, to this very moment NOW, the &#8220;second&#8221; has a certain value, and from NOW to 1 &#8220;second&#8221; into the future, this &#8220;second&#8221; has certain value. Are the two moments past_to_now now_to_future  &#8220;seconds&#8221; identical?..is the previous second compatable with the first &#8220;second&#8221;?</p>
<p>If there is no change, then there is no history, no past in time. There may be many molecular or atomic manouvering, permutations for every piece of matter in existence, but look at any single moment anywhere on Earth, and there is a vast amount of change happening, no two &#8220;seconds&#8221; are identical?</p>
<p>Although the measuring clock is identical, the fact one can go back 13 billion ly&#8217;s and find a Universe that has totally changed, means that locally &#8220;second_to_second&#8221; time NEVER changes, or there is never any recordable evidence to such changes, but Universe_to_Universe Bang_to_Rip, then there a not only vast amount of changes, the local Laws of Physics must have changes emmbedded into every local interaction, like a &#8220;new&#8221; geometric rubik cube appearing with a new set of rules and regulations?</p>
<p>Gravity for instance has today, &#8220;NOW&#8221; has four signatures, there are FOUR FOURCE&#8217;S <img src='http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' />  two of inner force (short range)we and two that can be demmed outer force (long range), these have been set sometime in the long distant past, just what changes occured to configure Gravity into this sequence, or order of sequence?</p>
<p>What if Gravity was a positive inner force &#8220;NOW&#8221;, and the strong molecular &#8220;now&#8221; force, relagated to the Atomic extreme?</p>
<p>Is there a time in the Universe, where all force&#8217;s interchange locally?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Merryman</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/comment-page-1/#comment-38724</link>
		<dc:creator>John Merryman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Apr 2008 15:35:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/#comment-38724</guid>
		<description>Paull,

 My point is what is happening in the now that decides among all the potential futures. That which will happen will be what is manifested by the energy of the universe. All other possibilities are the paths not taken. The question is what determines the path that the energy chooses. Often times it is like a meandering stream, pulled by larger forces of gravity, heat and convection, not going fast enough to force a straight path, bouncing off the hard spots, curving around, washing over the small stuff. As I said, if the order of past events is still vital and flexible to absorb new energy and the information it contains, even if it is simply a message of raw force, then the future is in many ways a continuation of past events, but if the old order is too rigid to accomodate fresh energy, this energy pushes the old out of the way and starts a new system of order. The first way is like the passage from spring to winter, as the new grows, aborbing sun, water and minerals, but necessarily becoming more rigid as it gets bigger. The second way is like the passage from winter to spring, as the dried out husk of the old is pushed aside by new life, cracking through where the shell is weak, or brittle. Action and reaction. In terms of current politics, you might say that McCain is winter, Obama is spring and Hillary is somewhere inbetween.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Paull,</p>
<p> My point is what is happening in the now that decides among all the potential futures. That which will happen will be what is manifested by the energy of the universe. All other possibilities are the paths not taken. The question is what determines the path that the energy chooses. Often times it is like a meandering stream, pulled by larger forces of gravity, heat and convection, not going fast enough to force a straight path, bouncing off the hard spots, curving around, washing over the small stuff. As I said, if the order of past events is still vital and flexible to absorb new energy and the information it contains, even if it is simply a message of raw force, then the future is in many ways a continuation of past events, but if the old order is too rigid to accomodate fresh energy, this energy pushes the old out of the way and starts a new system of order. The first way is like the passage from spring to winter, as the new grows, aborbing sun, water and minerals, but necessarily becoming more rigid as it gets bigger. The second way is like the passage from winter to spring, as the dried out husk of the old is pushed aside by new life, cracking through where the shell is weak, or brittle. Action and reaction. In terms of current politics, you might say that McCain is winter, Obama is spring and Hillary is somewhere inbetween.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Plato</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/comment-page-1/#comment-38723</link>
		<dc:creator>Plato</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Apr 2008 01:30:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/#comment-38723</guid>
		<description>Is there a possibility of a &quot;relativistic interpretation&quot; based at the QGP?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is there a possibility of a &#8220;relativistic interpretation&#8221; based at the QGP?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Valletta</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/comment-page-1/#comment-38721</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Valletta</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Apr 2008 01:10:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/02/incompatible-arrows-iii-lewis-carroll/#comment-38721</guid>
		<description>John, the future is bleak and empty, it has not yet happened, thus there is nothing there to change?

The past has gone, it will not happen over and over again, therefore there can be no change occuring in any system&#039;s past. The only change is the present time? To change the past, is to change the future, think about it, if you changed yesterday in any way, it would certainly have reprocusions for &quot;today&quot;, thus any change of past is a change of the future &quot;today&quot;?

Now we can make statements such as:&quot;There was change in the past&quot;..but how do we narrow it down to &quot;ago&quot;?..how long ago did changes happen?..10seconds ago?...five seconds ago?..1 second ago?..

Truth is, at every instant of &quot;ago&quot; there was change, infact the whole of the past was really changing events, there was never any moment in one&#039;s past wherby no change occured!

This now begs the question of:Will all future events involve &quot;change&quot;?

When you look back at today, from tomorrow, you will notice change, you cannot, repeat cannot!..record events 100%, that is the incomplete nature of Relativity?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John, the future is bleak and empty, it has not yet happened, thus there is nothing there to change?</p>
<p>The past has gone, it will not happen over and over again, therefore there can be no change occuring in any system&#8217;s past. The only change is the present time? To change the past, is to change the future, think about it, if you changed yesterday in any way, it would certainly have reprocusions for &#8220;today&#8221;, thus any change of past is a change of the future &#8220;today&#8221;?</p>
<p>Now we can make statements such as:&#8221;There was change in the past&#8221;..but how do we narrow it down to &#8220;ago&#8221;?..how long ago did changes happen?..10seconds ago?&#8230;five seconds ago?..1 second ago?..</p>
<p>Truth is, at every instant of &#8220;ago&#8221; there was change, infact the whole of the past was really changing events, there was never any moment in one&#8217;s past wherby no change occured!</p>
<p>This now begs the question of:Will all future events involve &#8220;change&#8221;?</p>
<p>When you look back at today, from tomorrow, you will notice change, you cannot, repeat cannot!..record events 100%, that is the incomplete nature of Relativity?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
