Dijkveer
Chance is imperative
(theorems about a reliable physics system)
W. v. Dijk
In this article is tried to formulate some theorems to generate a reliable physics system, a physics system like we meet in our familiar universe. It is demanded that the rules that are valid in a universe must be sufficient to generate that universe, the consistency theorem. In the other theorems chance plays an essential role. A number of rules, describing among others chance, are supposed to create the materialization of a universe. Important is the interaction between rules and matter. The possibility to maintain rules without interaction is doubted. The causality in such a universe is weak but present by the rules describing the possibility of realisation of chances. It seems unnecessary to assume consistency in a universe, though some problems rise, the existence of chance can compensate for it. The rules that created our universe hold at least some time after its genesis. We can therefore expect that at least some traces are left from the rules that created our universe. An effort is made the find some examples.
1 Introduction
The astonishment to exist in a world that is around us, is old and universal. The aim to explain that world is probably just as old but looking at the multitude of explanations and the vigour whereby they are questioned it is not easy to find the answers. Much of these explanations are after a long row of steps between of the type “it is just the way it is”. That a so little satisfying explanation makes one say; nothing should exist at all, may be intelligible but seems in clear contrast with the experience we have. A second group of explanations supposes that there exist such things as laws of nature which explain the necessity that the known universe takes shape. This thought may be intellectually more attractive, but convincing evidence or even indications that this is the right way to approach the question does hardly exist. The line of thought that I will follow in this article is that I presume that the universe we know exists and exists in such a way that the sequence of “questions why” terminates at some point. It is not meant that it is impossible to ask the next question but that it is unnecessary. It is often doubted, amongst others by Karl Popper, that this is impossible and may be it is, however the assumption that it should be possible leads to a number of demands to our world and may be innumerable other worlds, that should be fulfilled that makes it interesting to examine the assumption. These demands can partly be examined and partly will show us the direction of further research. This article contains five theorems which pinpoint the way the above mentioned might be realized.
There is a Dutch and an English version.
(theorems about a reliable physics system)
W. v. Dijk
In this article is tried to formulate some theorems to generate a reliable physics system, a physics system like we meet in our familiar universe. It is demanded that the rules that are valid in a universe must be sufficient to generate that universe, the consistency theorem. In the other theorems chance plays an essential role. A number of rules, describing among others chance, are supposed to create the materialization of a universe. Important is the interaction between rules and matter. The possibility to maintain rules without interaction is doubted. The causality in such a universe is weak but present by the rules describing the possibility of realisation of chances. It seems unnecessary to assume consistency in a universe, though some problems rise, the existence of chance can compensate for it. The rules that created our universe hold at least some time after its genesis. We can therefore expect that at least some traces are left from the rules that created our universe. An effort is made the find some examples.
1 Introduction
The astonishment to exist in a world that is around us, is old and universal. The aim to explain that world is probably just as old but looking at the multitude of explanations and the vigour whereby they are questioned it is not easy to find the answers. Much of these explanations are after a long row of steps between of the type “it is just the way it is”. That a so little satisfying explanation makes one say; nothing should exist at all, may be intelligible but seems in clear contrast with the experience we have. A second group of explanations supposes that there exist such things as laws of nature which explain the necessity that the known universe takes shape. This thought may be intellectually more attractive, but convincing evidence or even indications that this is the right way to approach the question does hardly exist. The line of thought that I will follow in this article is that I presume that the universe we know exists and exists in such a way that the sequence of “questions why” terminates at some point. It is not meant that it is impossible to ask the next question but that it is unnecessary. It is often doubted, amongst others by Karl Popper, that this is impossible and may be it is, however the assumption that it should be possible leads to a number of demands to our world and may be innumerable other worlds, that should be fulfilled that makes it interesting to examine the assumption. These demands can partly be examined and partly will show us the direction of further research. This article contains five theorems which pinpoint the way the above mentioned might be realized.
There is a Dutch and an English version.
contact and comments:
dijkveer.pub@zeelandnet.nl