 |
 |
mark
writes: Mathematics in Text Quote, ''In many places, the example that follows many obscure equations is really all that was needed; the technical details could be spared. I think that in a book like this, the physical equations are really pointless.'' In order for Penrose to make a valid point, i believe strong mathematics are indespensible. Without the mathematics, Penrose would simply be writing another meaningless book on AI. His discussion on time-symmetry is important because it form the foundations of physical reality that he must discuss. Admitting that he did digress from discussion from time to time, the general point however are nevertheless delivered with rigorous mathematics. The controversy plaguing Penrose are not due to his idea but due to his claim on the truth of his idea. Penrose aim is to prove his claim with a slight consideration of the lay public. His style is suitable for publications such as in the Physical Review but just how many of us can read the Physical Review effortlessly?? |
| [276] Posted on Sunday, 04 November 2007 at 14:10 GMT [Reply to this] [Permalink] |
©1997-2022 by Tal Cohen, all rights reserved. [About]