On 22 Sep 2014, at 3:21 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
That's why he can say consciousness is all-or-nothing (potentialities are
all-or-nothing). That's why he thinks an infant is more conscious than an
adult - it has more potential (but less realization). That's why he thinks
Dust, damned dust. Told yer.
K
On 22 Sep 2014, at 10:58 am, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
So cosmic inflation is apparently even less confirmed.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.5738
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
Here is an alternative paper suggesting the dust is not negligible but also
not disastrous:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.4491 published 3 days before the Planck paper
(above).
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 3:15 AM, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
Dust, damned dust. Told yer.
K
On 22 Sep
On 20 Sep 2014, at 6:22 am, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
Does this mean evolution is intelligent but (probably) not conscious?
The Blind Watchmaker
K
On 20 September 2014 03:01, Stephen Paul King stephe...@provensecure.com
wrote:
Dear Bruno,
I agree, this introduces the
On 22 September 2014 20:57, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
On 20 Sep 2014, at 6:22 am, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
Does this mean evolution is intelligent but (probably) not conscious?
The Blind Watchmaker
Yes.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 2:24 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 22 September 2014 12:07, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 1:34 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
Good point Brent and one on which I am also equivocal, which is why I
have been keen to tease
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 3:58 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy
multiplecit...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 3:22 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 9/21/2014 5:07 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 1:34 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
Good point Brent
http://lesswrong.com/lw/t6/the_cartoon_guide_to_l%C3%83%C6%92%C3%86%E2%80%99%C3%83%E2%80%A0%C3%A2%E2%82%AC%E2%84%A2%C3%83%C6%92%C3%A2%E2%82%AC%C5%A1%C3%83%E2%80%9A%C3%82%C2%B6bs_theorem/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To
On 22 Sep 2014, at 00:13, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/21/2014 9:41 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 19 Sep 2014, at 21:10, John Clark wrote:
although his name wasn't on the original paper Bohr was without a
doubt the greatest teacher of quantum mechanics who ever lived and
he was extraordinarily
On 22 Sep 2014, at 00:33, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/21/2014 10:08 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 20 Sep 2014, at 02:44, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/19/2014 9:35 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 19 Sep 2014, at 03:09, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/18/2014 5:46 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
Consciousness has a state
On 22 Sep 2014, at 01:11, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/21/2014 2:30 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
And I also know for a fact that those very same chemicals
degrade my ability to behave intelligently, and that's exactly what
you'd expect if Darwin was right.
Again, all I believe that can be said
On 22 Sep 2014, at 02:07, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 1:34 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
Good point Brent and one on which I am also equivocal, which is why
I have been keen to tease out whether people are talking about
consciousness or the contents of consciousness,
On 22 Sep 2014, at 02:24, LizR wrote:
On 22 September 2014 12:07, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 1:34 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
Good point Brent and one on which I am also equivocal, which is why
I have been keen to tease out whether people are
On 22 Sep 2014, at 03:22, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/21/2014 5:07 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 1:34 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
Good point Brent and one on which I am also equivocal, which is why
I have been keen to tease out whether people are talking about
On 22 Sep 2014, at 05:30, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/21/2014 6:58 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 3:22 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 9/21/2014 5:07 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 1:34 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
Good point
On 22 Sep 2014, at 06:23, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 5:30 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 9/21/2014 6:58 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 3:22 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 9/21/2014 5:07 PM, Telmo
On 22 Sep 2014, at 06:46, LizR wrote:
Surely Bruno doesn't think anything capable of (or having the
potential for) computation is conscious?
I hope my answer to Brent has clarified this.
It is clearer when said in the theory. We have the numbers 0, 1, 2,
3, ... Some are universal, and
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 8:52 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 22 Sep 2014, at 06:46, LizR wrote:
Surely Bruno doesn't think *anything *capable of (or having the potential
for) computation is conscious?
I hope my answer to Brent has clarified this.
It is clearer when said
On 9/22/2014 12:07 AM, Kim Jones wrote:
On 22 Sep 2014, at 3:21 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
That's why he can say consciousness is all-or-nothing (potentialities are
all-or-nothing). That's why he thinks an infant is more conscious than an
adult - it has more potential (but less
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 05:07:07PM +1000, Kim Jones wrote:
Are we not conflating slightly (to be) conscious - the fact of being aware
and sensate; experiencing being as it were.with consciousness that
woolly philosophical football? I think even in comman usage we don't do that.
I am
(Damn you, fingers. Or even *Doctor* Who...)
On 23 September 2014 14:29, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
That link doesn't work on Firefox, at least not for me. But it seems OK on
chrome...
I'm sure anyone who can follow a Doctro Who episode written by Steven
Moffat will have no trouble with
That link doesn't work on Firefox, at least not for me. But it seems OK on
chrome...
I'm sure anyone who can follow a Doctro Who episode written by Steven
Moffat will have no trouble with that proof.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List
Bruno merely asserts that nobody can mistake the fact that they exist.
Some people do, but it's considered pathological. But Bruno does more than
merely assert this. He then uses the same word, conscious in a
different, technical sense as a potential property of an axiomatic system.
And then
23 matches
Mail list logo
