Re: The spinoza papers: towards a theory of progress reporting

On Tue, 20 May 2008 12:25:15 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
<spinoza1111@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On May 20, 10:00 am, Qwertyioup <Qwertyi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2008 21:53:14 -0700 (PDT),spinoza1111

<spinoza1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

That is: you can't jettison the fundamental assertion that for any two
events in all of space of time, one happened before, at the same time,
or after the other (or, since events take time > 0), one of several
one-dimensional relations (before, starts before ends during, happens
'inside' the longer event's time frame and so on).

You missed the point completely.
"the non-uniqueness of possible ways of ordering "
That means that relativity has  shown that the concept of simultaneity
fails.

Observers in different frames of reference (ie. travelling at
different velocities) can see distant events in different sequences.

Don't try to understand physics by reading philosophy.

And don't try to draw  philosphical points by analogy with physics,
That's equally as silly and doomed to failure.

Look at the guy's email, willya? Your new best friend is an anonymous
stalker here on Lamma Island and possibly a danger to himself and
others.

In the last couple of weeks you keep claiming I'm "stalking" you. In
real life.

I've never laid eyes on you to my knowledge. I've never "sat in your
seat on the ferry". You're lying, or deluded. Maybe your prescription
has run out?

Anyway, obviously you got nothing when it comes to physics, so your
only response is ad hominem. Go back to making sociological metaphors.
No one bothers to read those, so you can probably get away with making
*** up there.

.