Re: [OPE-L] why does the debate on the "transformation problem" continue?

From: Paul Cockshott (clyder@GN.APC.ORG)
Date: Sun Mar 25 2007 - 18:08:22 EDT

Next message: Philip Dunn: "[OPE-L] Equivalent value and relative value"
Previous message: Paul Cockshott: "Re: [OPE-L] transformation"
In reply to: Jerry Levy: "[OPE-L] why does the debate on the "transformation problem" continue?"
Next in thread: Jerry Levy: "[OPE-L] advances and ongoing debates in physics and statistical mechanics?"
Reply: Jerry Levy: "[OPE-L] advances and ongoing debates in physics and statistical mechanics?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Quoting Jerry Levy <Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM>:

>
> Good question.   Maybe the debate on the TP is  for Marxists
> the modern equivalent of debates about the quantity of angels
> who can reside on a point of a needle?
>
> <http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a4_132.html>
>
Having checked your reference it appears that these debates
were an early investigation as to whether Angels followed Fermi-Dirac
or Bose-Einstein statistics, and as we now know, the latter
has some pretty damned weird consequences.

Paul Cockshott

www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~wpc
reality.gn.apc.org

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

Next message: Philip Dunn: "[OPE-L] Equivalent value and relative value"
Previous message: Paul Cockshott: "Re: [OPE-L] transformation"
In reply to: Jerry Levy: "[OPE-L] why does the debate on the "transformation problem" continue?"
Next in thread: Jerry Levy: "[OPE-L] advances and ongoing debates in physics and statistical mechanics?"
Reply: Jerry Levy: "[OPE-L] advances and ongoing debates in physics and statistical mechanics?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Mar 31 2007 - 01:00:12 EDT