# Re: Physics -> Anti-Holism... What?!!

Daniel Fabulich (daniel.fabulich@yale.edu)
Wed, 27 May 1998 15:18:07 -0400 (EDT)

On Wed, 27 May 1998, Ian Goddard wrote:

> IAN: Hay, we're making progress! Now you
> need to show what in physics supports your
> claim that atomism helps make predictions.
>
> Can you name any physical attribute of any
> thing, A, such as weight, size, velocity,
> color, that is assigned to A free from
> not-A. Since your so sure that such
> non-holism exists, this should be
> as easy knocking off one liners.
> Just show one example of atomism.
>
> with something more than another claim.

As a casual observer, your "holism" is trivial. It proves nothing that
atomism does not, and makes no predictions that atomism would not. All
you're saying is that A + -A = 0. Add A to both sides and you get A = A,
the atomist prediction. YOU'RE SAYING THE SAME THING.

Your presumption that A + -A = 0 somehow proves the mystical experience is
hogwash; the mystical experience is that A = -A because A = 0 and A- = 0.
The mystical experience demands that all things are all things, not that
the sum of all things is zero.

To show that the mystical experience holds true, you must show that 1 IS
0, not that the sum of the identity of 1 and not-1 is the same as the sum
of the identity of 0 and not-0 (which is trivially true), but that the
identity of 1 is equal to the identity of 0. Similarly, showing that the
sum of the differences in location with respect to multiple objects is
zero is again trivial; the mystical experience demands that all such
values actually BE zero. Same goes for time.

So, as an example of atomism working, I posit: everything holism predicts.