Meta-physics means 'above' or 'behind' physics. Any idea posted here, if it is in the right category, is not going to respect the laws of physics as we know them. It might use some, acknowledge a few, or even try to re-invent the whole system, but it will never totally comply with physics, thus making the idea impossible.

Having this category is asking for ideas that don't belong at the halfbakery.
-- lawpoop, Oct 28 2003

No It Doesn't http://dictionary.r...?q=metaphysics&r=67
Definitions of metaphics from Dictionary.com. Metaphysics has a bad rap. You might as well have said "mere-metaphics". Meta does mean 'above' but that means that it can also transcend (and include) your everyday conception of phycics. Theoretical/quantum physics is metaphysics until someone does the empirical experiments to test the hypothesies. [mtness, Oct 04 2004]

Yes It Does http://dictionary.r...e.com/search?q=meta
Dictionary.com says that meta means 'situated behind', 'beyond', or 'at a higher state'. [lawpoop, Oct 04 2004]

metaphysics http://www.halfbake...er_3a_20Metaphysics
you could have added a link [RobertKidney, Oct 04 2004]

Some metaphysical concepts probably inspire research on the non-metaphysical level. (walking through walls?) Possibly this category is synonymous to the option to bet on tie in Baccarat.
-- Zimmy, Oct 28 2003


Maybe this is the paradox within the halfbakery, the humble acceptance that things might not ALWAYS be exactly as we conceive them and that sometimes our human-invented measuring systems are not enough to comprehend the whole of life, the universe, energies, etc.

I know this because, being an agnostic (which means I don't take the ideas of ghosts, gods, angels, saints, for granted) I have been witness of various bizarre, metaphysical events since childhood, things that I can't understand and probably, no matter how hard I try, I might never will.

Things that go beyond our comprehension, that can't be measured by humans doesn't mean that can't exist.
-- Pericles, Oct 29 2003


Perhaps this is the clearest indicator yet that you don't comprehend the halfbakery, lawpoop.
-- waugsqueke, Oct 29 2003


[mtness] You're misinterpreting what I said. My definition of metaphysics is accurate. I'm not trying to say metaphysics is bad. There are plenty of respectable ideas that have no relation to physics -- like art, literature, music, etc.

Physics is a subset of meta-physics. In the help file, it says we should only post things that are possible. When you deal with metaphysics, you get a license to ignore physics, if you need to. It doesn't belong on the halfbakery, then, according to the help file.
-- lawpoop, Oct 29 2003


What was the problem again?
-- st3f, Oct 29 2003


I have this image of lawpoop overanalyzing this problem and eventually blowing a logic circuit and tilting, like one of Harry Mudd's Alice robots.
-- waugsqueke, Oct 29 2003


[ravenswood] well, in the other:metaphysical category, only one idea out of nine has crossaints. I'd say it's worthless.
-- lawpoop, Oct 29 2003


- because only lavishly-croissanted ideas are worth reading? [checks to see how many croissants this idea has]
-- hippo, Oct 30 2003


Personally, I have to voice my dissent with the majority opinion. I think [lawpoop] may be right, in that anything in the category invites an [m-f-d]: magic, or [m-f-d]: theory, or similar.

Paging, [jutta], your opinion on the matter is desired.
-- RayfordSteele, Oct 30 2003


I disagree. Just because there aren't many good ideas there just now doesn't mean there won't be in the future. I think we should keep it, just in case. And besides, removing the category won't stop people posting metaphyscal ideas - they'll just end up in the Other: General section instead.
-- lostdog, Oct 30 2003


The very fact that the ideas are in "other:metaphysical" has always meant that they get slightly different consideration than ideas in other categories. This is true of several categories here, like health: immortality, other: faster than light, and most anything in the halfbakery category. Ray, you know this.

Is it fair? Who cares?
-- waugsqueke, Oct 30 2003


Well... not that different. Whether an ideas fits the halfbakery and what category to put it in are two different thought processes in my head.

That said, I think that it's unusual for an idea that fits neatly into the metaphysics category to fit the halfbakery well. This might go some way to explaining why ideas in that category are not that generally dripping with croissants.

Responding more directly to the idea, I don't see why a group of ideas that are more on the edge of the halfbakery than others shouldn't have a category that fits them well. Deleting the category just creates the task of finding homes for ideas that seem to be fairly happy where they currently are.
-- st3f, Oct 30 2003


I'm not so sure the rules haven't been a little tighter as of late. The halfbakery category being an exception.
-- RayfordSteele, Oct 30 2003


the branch of philosophy that deals with first principles and seeks to explain the nature of being or reality (ontology) and of the origin and structure of the universe (cosmology): it is closely associated with the study of the nature of knowledge (epistemology)
-- undata, Sep 13 2006


Etymological note:

Like many Greek prepositions, 'meta' has multiple translations, of which the relevant one here is 'after'.

As with many obscure English abstractions derived from Greek, the original phrase in Greek is a very simple and concrete one.

It derives from the fact that Aristotle wrote about some of the topics now covered by the term 'metaphysics' *after* he'd written about physics.

(I know this sounds a bit like some of those lame urban-myth etymologies that circulate by email sometimes, but I think I was taught it properly at uni, so I'm regarding it as true).

My point: It is unwise to draw any conclusions from the form of the word 'metaphysics' about the relation of metaphysics to physics. That's because, in this case, no helpful information is encoded in that word-form.
-- pertinax, Sep 13 2006


// It is unwise to draw any conclusions from the form of the word 'metaphysics' ...because...no helpful information is encoded in that word-form//

Which, of course, raises the question "Do you think it's for the same thing as I think it is?". It sort of reinforces lawpoop's original point although not in the way that he meant. Or that I thought that he meant, although you might think differently of course. Thinking about stuff is way too hard if you ask me. Is it time for dinner yet?
-- DrBob, Sep 13 2006


//Is it time for dinner yet?//
I'm having a sandwich (ham and emmental cheese)
-- zen_tom, Sep 13 2006


The halfbakery is fundamentally a filing system for ideas and concepts. Worryingly, the concept "the halfbakery exists" (insofar as it exists within this site) will reside within the category other:metaphysical as it is entirely a metaphysical issue. Removing this category may actually remove the concept "the halfbakery exists" from the internal conceptual structure of the website, negating its very existence. This is a very dangerous idea. [-]
-- wagster, Sep 14 2006


[pertinax] is right. From Collins English Dictionary: the branch of philosophy that deals with first principles, esp. of being and knowing. [...from Greek _ta meta ta phusica_ the things after the physics, from the arrangement of the subjects treated in the works of Aristotle]

My problem with this idea is that it smacks of:
"You won't want to have the windows open with new Breathe-o-Smart."

Also, shouldn't this be in other:metaphysics?
-- spidermother, Sep 14 2006


There's a couple of categories here which seem difficult to post in without getting [m-f-d]'d as "theory" or "not an invention".

Notably:
other: philosophy
fashion: hosiery: socks: theory
-- phundug, Sep 14 2006


I thought you'd made that last one up, [phundug]. I may have to explore that avenue.
-- wagster, Sep 14 2006



random, halfbakery