Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] The "why" questions



The notion of cause and effect:

Consider a move in a chess game that has a definite consequence (eg the capture of an
opposing piece). The two events are not causally related, they are only connected
by the rules of the game. I want "cause" to mean more than just a
connection by rules (even nature's rules) - but what exactly is that "more"?

I think that Einstein was referring to just such considerations when he wrote:

“What really interests me is whether God had any choice in the creation of the world.”

In other words, is a given law of nature just a rule arbitrarily chosen by the creation process
(chosen perhaps by some intelligent creator or by some natural selection process, or . . .)?
If so, then such laws are just like the rules of chess, and fall short of my requirement for an inherent cause/effect relation.

The alternative is that some laws of nature are perhaps mandated by the ontological/metaphysical requirements of BEING itself - so that even God had to comply?
This would qualify as an inherent cause/effect relation.

Fire away!

Bob Sciamanda
Physics, Edinboro Univ of PA (Em)
treborsci@verizon.net
http://mysite.verizon.net/res12merh/