From: phys2094@waikato.ac.nz
Subject: Re: "Space" -- apology and clarification
Date: 5 Aug 90 11:14:06 +1200
Message-ID: <1141.26bbff7e@waikato.ac.nz>
Organization: University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand


In article <9007250107.AA01311@hitl.vrnet.washington.edu>, william@hitl.vrnet.wa
shington.edu (William Bricken) writes:
> In reference to the nature of SPACE:
> 
> The mathematical theory of measurement provides a concise summary ofthe
...
> William Bricken
> HITL, UW
> 
> william@hitl.vrnet.washington.edu

I responded to the above note in what has proven to be a controversial note.
An apology is in order.

At the time of sending the note, I was not familiar with the measurement
theory discussed by Bricken.  I charged into this newsgroup unfamiliar
with cyberspace and measurement theory like a bull in a china shop and I
wound up bruising myself.  I apologize for remarks which offended researchers
in the subject of virtual reality, etc, and note here that I retract
criticisms of the concept of space in measurement theory.

Please note that I do not withdraw all my criticisms, but here I restate them
in the hope of generating a rational response.  Here are some criticisms.

> TIME is just another space, one that we have forgotten how to travel freely 
> in.

1. I cannot but interpret this to mean that humans have had the ability to
journey through time.  This to me is not a justifiable scientific statement.

> IMAGINARY:  contradictory spaces. Sqrt[-1].  Both True and False.  EG:
>   our construction of mental images from words, wave propagation, inside a
>   black hole.

2. I object to illustrating contradictory spaces with wave propagation and
black hole interiors.

> For grounding, it is commonly assumed that our everyday living space is 
> composed of three REAL spaces at right angles.  In fact, this idea was 
> made up in the middle of the sixteenth century by Descartes. Cyberspace 
> illustrates the notion that space is quite arbitrary, it provides an 
> opportunity to retrain ourselves to perceive all the other types of space.  

3. The above statement originated my confusion about spaces.  Perhaps my
ignorance is coming through again, but I cannot accept that concept of space
in Descartes' sense can be extended to include the measurement theory types
of spaces as perhaps orthogonal extensions.  The article gives me the
impression that somehow the measure theory spaces are somehow tangible 
through perception.

To be precise: I feel that the article submitted by Bricken borders on
science fiction, the merits of measurement theory notwithstanding.
Whereas research on virtual worlds is valid and unassailable, the dis-
cussion by Bricken seems not to add to the quality of the research: rather
concepts are introduced which detract from the metaphysical foundations of
the research field.

I admit that I am an outsider and am neither a mathematician nor am I involved
in research in cyberspace.  However, despite the voluminous hate mail that I
have received telling me to get lost, I intend to continue reading this news-
group.  I intend to learn more about the subject.  However, I feel that even
an outsider should criticise points which are objectionable.  This is a
SCIENCE newsgroup and participants should be meticulous about separating
SCIENCE and science fiction.  And those of you in the field who were offended
by my note should realise that other outsiders read this newsgroup and would
appreciate help in separating fact and fiction.

Perhaps my opinions still require revision.  Perhaps with this apology I can
generate rational responses.  If I am wrong or if I am just misinterpreting
matters, then please enlighten me.

-- Barry