what equals what?! under what condition?

[MJA]

I enjoy the topic of the thread.

Even two electrons are ideally not equal to each other except (potentially) in the context of mass and electrical charge, but they're not equal in terms of positions in space or time.

In a very real sense, there can't exist two things that are in all respects identical because they would be perceived the same as one and this should even be true of thought - if there's a manner two perceive them as two separate things then there should be at least one property that separates them.

This X and this X are not identical in that they occur at different locations within this sentence.

Similar to observations in quantum mechanics, I think assumptions of equality arise from the replacement of some distinct property by an unknown which makes those objects appear superimposed as indistinguishable from each other.

But an interesting thought is that, similar to Plato's cave, there may exist physical quantities larger than 1 and if something could truly only be measured as some none 1 to 1 ratio but there was no way to separate the individual elements constructing this ratio, then it may be that there exist objects that are effectively equal to each other in a mathematical sense, yet not identical or distinguishable.

A physical number 2 would ideally be constructed from a pair of inseparable and indistinguishable things - they could not be separated into 1 + 1 except in some abstract manner. So if we had a ratio of 2 to 1 between some trees, for example 6 trees on one block and 3 trees on another block, these trees are not "equal" in the sense of an identity - each tree is unique and distinct and we could count them individually, but if there existed a physical property that was in a 2 to 1 ratio with some other property, then one of these properties could be composed of 2 (or more) things and if these were not constructed from selecting to group separate observations as a single property, then it should imply the existence of two inseparable things ... but I have a feeling that ultimately it may not be possible to measure things in this manner because we could always ask what measurements constructed the 2 to 1 ratio and it would appear that it would have to arise from measuring at least 3 separate things, even if it was somehow ultimately only a detection of a single event, it would have to had the potential to at least been detected by 3 previously observed (or even imagined) detectors and each of these should be unique and distinct in some fashion.

Likely the closest we can get to an equality is the relationship that exists between (imagined) unknowns, though as soon as any of them become known, they're no longer identical (I think that's where the infinite to finite conversion happens - infinities are made by recurring processes that don't need to change and could be interpreted as having remained identical over time, though within different input/output contexts and so each application of such a process creates a relationship between inputs/outputs that is qualitatively identical in every such grouping, even if it is not working with identical elements - in this case, it's still not a demonstrable identity at any moment as the information flowing through it remains unique over time, but after extracting the commonalities between these events, then we can deduce with some confidence that an identical process has recurred across these elements, even if it's reflected in unique manners at each moment)

Really Steve, So Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is incorrect.
How do you measure an electron's speed and position at the same time?
Oh and: is an electron a wave or a particle, or both?
Is nature truly measurable, or was Heisenbergs uncertainty only a tip of the real berg?
What do you think?
Thanks,

=
MJA

[labelwench]

Hello SteveA, MJA and fellow questors,

I shall leave you gentlemen to discuss the scientific merits of this thread, coming to it from another angle.

Equal and Equality are abstract constructs of language and mathematics, each of which are also abstract constructs of the human mind.

You are seemingly using an abstract concept to debate further theoreticals, and Labelwench predicts that such discourse may well range widely without coming to any certainty.

Not that it doesn't make for an interesting read, so do carry on.....

Labelwench

[MJA]

Hello SteveA, MJA and fellow questors,

I shall leave you gentlemen to discuss the scientific merits of this thread, coming to it from another angle.

Equal and Equality are abstract constructs of language and mathematics, each of which are also abstract constructs of the human mind.

You are seemingly using an abstract concept to debate further theoreticals, and Labelwench predicts that such discourse may well range widely without coming to any certainty.

Not that it doesn't make for an interesting read, so do carry on.....

Labelwench

The day you know the infinite universe as well as yourself are absolutely or truly equal or One, is the day you'll be One with God, or One with All. TOE is this Way.
Equality will help you along Way.
The Way to freedom is,

=
MJA

[SB_UK]

Equality will help you along Way.

The larger the ipod touch (ps I don't have one) community
- the more the fun

as
- the more hardware mods and free software is released by community members.

~*~

Being the same has its benefits
->- points

the Way to freedom

[labelwench]

You have a good point here SB__UK.

Making equal opportunity and access available to all, or the 'level playing field' concept.

As an example, a classroom setting. Each student given a netbook of the same model and capacity.

Each with internet access to the same programs for the same period of time.

All factors as equal as can be so made.

Now, that being said, even if the students were all the same age and gender, and given the same topic and parameters to work within, what is the outcome of this experiment going to be?

I predict that you will not end up with a classroom of identical nor equal works.

So what equals what? under what condition?

[SB_UK]

I predict that you will not end up with a classroom of identical nor equal works.

I agree.

Ask a group of people to draw one particular (the same) garden -
- and the guys'll locate themselves in different corners, at different heights and different distances from the garden

- as more and more people are invited in
to draw the garden
- and these images are collated (by the artists) into a single collage
- so -
will the big picture emerge
in one continuous piece

for future generations of visitors to enjoy

- contribute to,
if they like
- though there's really no need -

- no need until future generations evolve greater perceptual abilities (observe more colours, see greater detail)

- at which point (following repeat of that original process) the big picture will be seen to have evolved up to generate a more highly granular big picture view over

back at

that garden.

Nothing is real and nothing to get hung about.
Strawberry Fields forever.

meets

A beautiful place out in the country, Boards of Canada

All the same

Back at that garden
Strawberry Fields
A beautiful place out in the country

[labelwench]

Excellent, SB__UK. We are able to collaborate in this area, yet we can honestly and respectfully challenge each other to greater ponder in arenas where we may hold different opinions or perspectives.

From a good friend, who was both a student and a mentor to me, I learned that one can disagree, without being disagreeable.

Passions can run high, especially when topics are near to one's heart, and the middle ground can be hard to find.

Nice to discuss with you. Time to fly....night shift soon.

Regards,

Labelwench

I agree.

Ask a group of people to draw one particular (the same) garden -
- and the guys'll locate themselves in different corners, at different heights and different distances from the garden

- as more and more people are invited in
to draw the garden
- and these images are collated (by the artists) into a single collage
- so -
will the big picture emerge
in one continuous piece

for future generations of visitors to enjoy

- contribute to,
if they like
- though there's really no need -

- no need until future generations evolve greater perceptual abilities (observe more colours, see greater detail)

- at which point (following repeat of that original process) the big picture will be seen to evolve to generate a more highly granular big picture of the garden.

[SB_UK]

Excellent, SB__UK. We are able to collaborate in this area, yet we can honestly and respectfully challenge each other to greater ponder in arenas where we may hold different opinions or perspectives.

From a good friend, who was both a student and a mentor to me, I learned that one can disagree, without being disagreeable.

Passions can run high, especially when topics are near to one's heart, and the middle ground can be hard to find.

Nice to discuss with you. Time to fly....night shift soon.

Regards,

Labelwench

- really ??? not ??? so sure that I (myself) have any opinions on anything particularly
- strangely

- it feels (to me) as though my mind switches position on information -
- that there's no definite me

- nothing I can use to fill out a CV
- that me is a conditional construct on information which I find meaningful
- which stabilizes my mind.

an aspirationally stable
- stable structure with local scope
effectively globally.

'not until the next time'

[labelwench]

- really ??? not ??? so sure that I (myself) have any opinions on anything particularly
- strangely

- it feels (to me) as though my mind switches position on information -
- that there's no definite me

- nothing I can use to fill out a CV - that me is a conditional construct on information which I find meaningful
- which stabilizes my mind.

an aspirationally stable
- stable structure with local scope
effectively globally.

No opinions on anything particularly?

What about 'KILL MONEY'?

I had to ask.........

[MJA]

You have a good point here SB__UK.

Making equal opportunity and access available to all, or the 'level playing field' concept.

As an example, a classroom setting. Each student given a netbook of the same model and capacity.

Each with internet access to the same programs for the same period of time.

All factors as equal as can be so made.

Now, that being said, even if the students were all the same age and gender, and given the same topic and parameters to work within, what is the outcome of this experiment going to be?

I predict that you will not end up with a classroom of identical nor equal works.

So what equals what? under what condition?

What makes the studients equal? Let me count the infinite Ways.

They are all students, people, animals, humans, etc., with legs, arms hands, fingers, eyes, ears, nose, mouth, etc., living in the same class room, town county, city, state, country, planet, solar system, universe, etc., are breathing the same air, drinking the same water, exposed to the same climate,etc., doing the same thing, doing the same work, using the same computers, etc., etc., etc.. (Wasn't that Shakespeare?)

BUT! you find them different, not equal, not the same. Well what is the difference, how you judge or score them? Do you judge everything in the universe that is so equal to everything else the same? What about grains of sand on a beach. Do you see them all different too, or simple and equally One or the beach? And what ants, are they equal to you or are you so divine that you can measure their differences too. And once you are done measuring, are you absolutely certain of your measurement, or perhaps you should do it again. I think you should. And evertime you measure nature does it come out the same? Is measure the flaw or is it simply You?

Life without measure is One!

=
MJA