|
|
Randy Poe wrote:
> Mike Kelly wrote:
> > Tony Orlow wrote:
> > > Mike Kelly wrote:
> > > Nothing is allowed to happen at noon in either experiment.
> >
> > Nothing "happens" at noon? I take this to mean that there is no
> > insertion or removal of balls at noon, yes? Well, I agree with that.
> > But what relevence does this have to the statement "noon does not
> > exist"? What does that even *mean*?
> >
> > When you've been saying "noon doesn't exist", you actually mean to say
> > "no insertion or removal of balls occurs at noon"?
> >
> > How about this experiment, does noon "exist" in this experiment :
> >
> > Insert a ball labelled "1" into the vase at one minute to noon.
> >
> > ?
>
> I think that when Tony and Han say "noon doesn't exist" they
> really mean "there is no noon on the clock in that experiment",
> as a way of saying "I have no idea how to answer questions about
> noon in that experiment, so I'll say that there is no noon and that
> way I don't have to answer any such questions."
>
> I've asked questions similar to yours. The answer is: "It's easy
> for me to figure out there's a ball in the vase at noon. Therefore
> I will allow noon to 'exist' in this problem."
What really puzzles me though is that sometimes Tony is quite happy to
answer what the state of things is at noon, even while he denies at the
same time that noon "exists". Or perhaps sometimes he'll say that noon
only "exists" if we "allow infinite iterations"; as if somehow the
insertion of balls into the vase is what causes the clock to move
forwards.
--
mike.
|
|