On Tue, 2004-01-27 at 11:57, Phil Barker wrote:
> Well, taking a broad definition for gadget, and a resource to be "anything
> that has identity ... 'anything that is identifiable', i.e. anthing that
> can be named or described",
Danger, Will Robinson! Identify and describe are different things. So I
think God is probably a resource, but one that cannot be described in
metadata.
But is the following heresy then:
<god> <ex:name> "God"
??
> 2) At a quantum level, particles can be in a state of entanglement, in
> which they lose their identity.
... this is more interesting. Not even in your description of the
"gadget" (i.e., one of the particles) can you find a way of identifying
a specific one. So this is probably valid... But is it really a gadget?
:-) I suppose most physicists like to then of them as "real" particles,
so the answer would be yes. But note that we're immediately on very deep
ontological (!) problems.
/Mikael
--
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
The more things change, the more they stay the same
|