Re: from the BBC:

Baird Stafford wrote:
In article <d4sdi4putrhfhg19kohqi6ke1l81be2e5p@xxxxxxx>,
Halla <halla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


Suppose that Fred existed shortly after the Big Bang. He had unlimited
intelligence and memory, and knew all the scientific laws governing
the universe and all the properties of every particle that then
existed.


I didn't know Fred Hoyle was quite that good....

<snip>

And he didn't even believe in the Big Bang; he named it out of derision. I've always taken pure determinism as resting on a philosophical absurdity, the infinite regress. Besides which, Werner (since the writer of the article seems to be on a first name basis with those folks, I guess I'm supposed to be too, though I certainly did not meet Heisenberg in the course of my present incarnation) tells us that no one can really know both where a particle is and what it's doing at the same time, and implies (without desire, but certainly with knowledge) that sub-atomic particles have free will -- whether we bigger energy-compendiums do or not.

I also don't believe in the Big Bang -- I suggest (with no learned grounds at all, but that's okay) the matter in our Universe is probably the result of a bunch of little bangs (white holes --> quassars), which means we're the continuing swirl of a delightful cosmic fireworks display.

I wonder who's been watching the show? Fred?


--
Blessed Be,
Gale

original fiction, poetry, reviews http://www.capjewels.com

"Progress which pursues only the next invention, progress which pulls thought out of the mind and replaces it with idle slogans, is not progress at all. It is a beckoning mirage in a desert over which stagger the generations of men." -- Loren Eisley, _The Firmament of Time_
.

Relevant Pages
Loading