<div dir="ltr"><div>Yes. Because the verb require is intenSional and takes a proposition as its object. Thus, if you graph the sentence, it really goes "Physical Law requires [that momentum be conserved]" Who is physical law to do that?</div><div><br></div><div>I would say that in saying it that way you have introduced a category error. Physical laws don't compel obedience. they are themselves the overarching sum of such obedience. <br></div><div><br></div><div>Why not simply, "Everywhere momentum is conserved and that fact constitutes a law that governs our behavior if we want to successfully manipulate the world." If we choose to manipulate the world successfully, the facts require us to expect that momentum will in all cases be conserved. The compulsion is from facts to us, rather than from the law to the facts.</div><div><br></div><div>Are there important exceptions to my belief that laws have no causal properties? That we are not in need of such an hypothesis?</div><div><br></div><div>Nick<br></div><div><br></div><div>Nick<br></div><div><br></div><div>N<br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 5:54 PM Frank Wimberly <<a href="mailto:wimberly3@gmail.com">wimberly3@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div>The puck conserves angular momentum as required by the physical law. Is that telic language?</div><div><br></div><div>---<br>Frank C. Wimberly<br>140 Calle Ojo Feliz, <br>Santa Fe, NM 87505<br><br>505 670-9918<br>Santa Fe, NM</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Aug 6, 2024, 3:10 PM Nicholas Thompson <<a href="mailto:thompnickson2@gmail.com" target="_blank">thompnickson2@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>Dear Phellow Phriammers, <br></div><div><br></div><div>Ever since the days of Hywel White (GRHS) I have puzzled over the fact that telic language so often appears in physics discussions. I used to tease Hywel that Psychology must be the Mother of Physics, because he had to use psychological terms to describe the motion of particles. More recently, I have the same sort of discussions with Stephen Guerin who wants to use telic language concerning the path of photons and least action. (I hope I have this right, Stephen). You all have been tempted to think I am just trolling, but I don't think I am. I think there may be places where such descriptions are appropriate. I do think, for instance, that the relation between the first derivative of a function and any point in that function is analogous to the relation between the motivation of a behavior and the behavior itself. <br></div><div><br></div><div>i am back to weather again, after a vacation from it for my obsession with unsuccessful vegetable gardening. Here is a quote from an Atmospheric Dynamics text which is laying out the Coriolis Force. </div><div><br></div><div style="margin-left:40px"><b>What happens if we consider the hockey puck moving equator-ward relative to the rotation of the Earth. In the absence of applied forces it <i>must</i> conserve angular momentum. Upon being pulled equator-ward in the northern hemisphere the radius of rotation of the puck begins to increase.Consequently, an anti-rotational relative motion<i> develops</i> <i>in order to</i> conserve angular momentum, <i>[Italics by NST</i>] </b><br></div><div><br></div><div>In the view of folks on this list, is this an appropriate use of telic language, and why or why not? Stephen has a defensible argument in favor of it's appropriateness, the only such argument I have ever heard. ( I don[t buy the premises, but the argument is sound) I am wondering about the rest of you.</div><div><br></div><div>Nick<br></div></div>
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .<br>
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom <a href="https://bit.ly/virtualfriam" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://bit.ly/virtualfriam</a><br>
to (un)subscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>
FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a><br>
archives: 5/2017 thru present <a href="https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/</a><br>
1/2003 thru 6/2021 <a href="http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .<br>
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom <a href="https://bit.ly/virtualfriam" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://bit.ly/virtualfriam</a><br>
to (un)subscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>
FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a><br>
archives: 5/2017 thru present <a href="https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/</a><br>
1/2003 thru 6/2021 <a href="http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br clear="all"><br><span class="gmail_signature_prefix">-- </span><br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div>Nicholas S. Thompson</div><div>Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology</div><div>Clark University<br></div></div></div>