[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Thermal death, Physics's reign Re: Origine of Life

Hi chu' Aiviet,

At Sunday 10/17/99 06:31 PM -0700, you wrote:
Tay na`y cu~ng subjectivist na(.ng. Ta.i sao "du+.a
va`o" ma` la.i tu+o+ng ddu+o+ng vo+'i "is deducted
to".
Ho?i xem ha('n xem cu+' du+.a va`o ca'i gi` thi` cu~ng
deduct ddu+o+.c co' pha?i kho^ng. Dde^` nghi. ha('n
cho bie^'t ca'i phe'p deduction tu+` Physics ( ta cu+'
no'i co+ ho.c co^? ddie^?n cho de^~) ve^` psychology
the^' na`o.

"Deduct" o*? dda^y du`ng theo y' "du`ng ca'c model cu?a mo^.t discipline na`y dde^? ti`m ca'ch gia?i quye^'t ca'c va^'n dde^` cu?a discipline kha'c/." Vie^.c xa^y du*.ng models trong Physics phu. thuo^.c va`o experience, background, etc. cu?a physicist/. Cha(?ng ha.n ne^'u Newton la` nguo*`i Trung Quo^'c thi` co' le~ 3 ddi.nh lua^.t cu?a o^?ng dda~ co' "khi'" trong ddo' thay vi` "lu*.c"/. Hai models na`y ro~ ra`ng la` kha'c ha(?n nhau/. Mo^.t vi' du. kha'c nu*~a la` nhu*~ng ca'i assumption "ddie^`u kie^.n ly' tuo*?ng": bo? qua friction, mass, heat generated, a lot of them/. Bo? qua ca'i gi`, bo? qua dde^'n mu*'c na`o, dde^`u phu. thuo^.c va`o psychology cu?a researcher/.

  Tho^ng thu+o+`ng quan he^. do deduction ga^y ra
gio^'ng nhu+ quan he^. giu+~a mo^.t toa`n the^? va`
ca'c tha`nh pha^`n cu?a no'. Qua' tri`nh sinh va^.t
na`o ma` kho^ng co' qua' tri`nh va^.t ly' hay
sinh-ho'a tham gia. Ne^'u to^`n ta.i mo^.t qua' tri`nh
nhu+ the^' thi` kho^ng the^? deduct biology ve^`
Physics.

Cho^~ na`y ho*i kho' no'i/. DDu'ng la` qua' tri`nh sinh va^.t bao go^`m ca'c qua' tri`nh Ly' - Ho'a, nhu*ng kho^ng pha?i mo^.t chuo^~i qua' tri`nh Ly'-Ho'a na`o cu~ng qualify as qua' tri`nh sinh va^.t/. Pha?i co' ca'i gi` dda^'y the^m va`o, namely organization/. DDie^?m ma^'u cho^'t o*? dda^y la` ne^'u cu*' xem xe't biological entities qua ca'c qua' tri`nh Ly'-Hoa' thi` kho^ng gia?i quye^'t dduo*.c ca'c va^'n dde^` trong Sinh ho.c, ngay tu*` va^'n dde^` co* ba?n nhu* ta.i sao loa`i na`y sau mo^.t tho*`i gian la.i tro*? tha`nh loa`i kha'c/.

  Well. Co' ngu+o+`i cha^'p nha^.n, co' ngu+o+`i
kho^ng. Ta.i sao la.i "pha?i". Chu+~ pha?i na`y chi?
pha?n a'nh chu? quan.

My bad :-)/.

 Ne^'u to^i dda~ theo dda.o
thie^n chu'a, to^i tha^'y co' ca'c ba(`ng chu+'ng khoa
ho.c tha^'y ra(`ng 6-day model is bad, nhu+ng to^i
chu+a ti`m tha^'y ca'i gi` thay the^', thi` to^i
"pha?i" ta.m cha^'p nha^.n. Ne^'u to^i kho^ng pha?i
ti'n ddo^` TCG, to^i tha^'y ca'c ba(`ng chu+'ng cho
ra(`ng 6-day model is bad, tuy chu+a co' ly' thuye^'t
na`o nhu+ng to^i dda~ co' the^? no'i Genesis is wrong.

Don't get me wrong, I'm one heck of a Evolutionist and NOT a Christian/.

No'i ddi no'i la.i, cuo^'i cu`ng thi` point cu?a tui la` the^' na`y: Ca'ch dda(.t ca^u ho?i "What is truer, Creationism or Evolution?" la` kho^ng make sense la('m/. Mo^~i theory co' domain cu?a no'/. Evolution ro~ ra`ng la` better developed than Creationism vi` yields nhie^`u he^. qua? ho*n/. Ta kho^ng (chu*a) the^? du`ng Creationism dde^? nghie^n cu*'u Sinh ho.c, ddie^`u na`y cha('c kho?i pha?i ba`n/.

Creationism la` general law, cu~ng nhu* symmetries trong physics/. Ca^u ho?i o*? dda^y la` "What is the ultimate meaning of existence"  hay la` ca'i gi` ddo' dda.i loa.i nhu* the^'/. DDo' la` ca'i con nguo*`i ddang ti`m hie^?u, va` trong khi chu*a ti`m dduo*.c thi` ta.m tho*`i pha?i cha^'p nha^.n Creationism/. Ta^'t nhie^n se~ co' nguo*`i tin va`o model na`y hay model kha'c, cu~ng nhu* ba^y gio*` va^~n co' nguo*`i kho^ng tin Evolution/. Y' tui khi no'i 2 theory na`y to^`n ta.i song song la` va^.y/. Nhie^`u truo*`ng ho*.p du`ng Evolution thua^.n tie^.n ho*n, trong ca'c truo*`ng ho*.p kha'c du`ng Creationism thua^.n tie^.n ho*n/. Va^'n dde^` co`n la.i la` du`ng ca'i gi` trong truo*`ng ho*.p na`o/.

Cheers,
Vu~