Re: Eternal return

Yeah, Frank Tipler proposed this more seriously, and Sabine Hossenfelder, more recently., speculatively, via quantum mechanics. Many trans-humanists hate this proposal because, hey, no continuity. Years ago, philosopher, Robert Nozick proposed a pragmatic, closest continuer hypothesis.

Re: Huh? (was Allah nonsense​)​

Only if it works for you, otherwise, there's no point. If you don't like pasta, nobody can make you like pasta. Ok, maybe rigatoni? -Original Message- From: Bruno Marchal To: everything-list Sent: Sun, Jun 23, 2019 7:40 am Subject: Re: Huh? (was Allah nonsense​)​ On 23 Jun 2019, at

Re: Allah: the One and Only Deity

On top of all this, Bruno, they have become less shrewd and more bumbling, like the generation of leaders before WW1.  -Original Message- From: Bruno Marchal To: everything-list Sent: Sun, Jun 23, 2019 7:36 am Subject: Re: Allah: the One and Only Deity On 23 Jun 2019, at 01:29,

Re: The anecdote of Moon landing

On 6/23/2019 5:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 21 Jun 2019, at 21:49, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List > wrote: On 6/21/2019 5:35 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 21 Jun 2019, at 09:04, Bruce Kellett > wrote: On Fri,

Re: determinism and randomness in QM

On 6/23/2019 1:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:  That sounds a bit observer dependent. Yes. It is. The physical reality becomes a first person plural view of arithmetic seen by itself from the universal number/machine perspective. An observer is just a (Löbian) machine seen from the material

Re: The anecdote of Moon landing

On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 11:20 AM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > On 6/21/2019 4:57 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > From the first person point of view, after all, the probability is not > known in advance. > > > I'm not sure what "known" means in that.

Re: The Science of Consciousness, Interlaken 2019

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 6:19:34 PM UTC-5, Cosmin Visan wrote: > > What is a "proto"experience ? > *Panprotoexperientialism* basically combines *panexperientialism* and *panprotopsychism*. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panpsychism#Panexperientialism

Re: The Science of Consciousness, Interlaken 2019

What is a "proto"experience ? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the

Re: The Science of Consciousness, Interlaken 2019

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 4:52:02 PM UTC-5, Cosmin Visan wrote: > > [image: Full poster.png] > > > My poster for TSC. > "Emergence" seems similar to "fusion" (of [proto]experiences) of https://heddahasselmorch.com/ . @philipthrift -- You received this message because you are subscribed

Re: The Science of Consciousness, Interlaken 2019

Right-click -> Copy image location, to see the full picture in a new tab. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to

Re: Eternal return

On 6/21/2019 9:27 AM, Eva wrote: Given that time is irreversible, and global entropy always increase: 1. In principle, sooner or later, every living system such as human being, or humanity will be annihilated? 2. In principle, if system is annihilated then it is irreversible - a system

Re: A purely relational ontology?

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 12:15:15 PM UTC+2, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 21 Jun 2019, at 18:18, PGC > wrote: > > > > On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 12:56:59 PM UTC+2, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 20 Jun 2019, at 17:20, PGC wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thursday, June 20, 2019 at 3:58:17 PM UTC+2,

Re: Eternal return

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 8:41:54 AM UTC-5, Eva wrote: > > Given that time is irreversible, and global entropy always increase: > > 1. In principle, sooner or later, every living system such as human being, > or humanity will be annihilated? > > 2. In principle, if system is annihilated then

Re: Zero-totality

On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 at 23:41, Eva wrote: > Hello > > I want to talk with you about Dr. Peter Rowlands works, which I find very > fascinating. > > Here is his talk about foundations od physical laws: > https://youtu.be/BGAopIzAjyk > > Here is paper: > >

Observation versus assumption (was: anecdote of Moon landing)

I changed the title of this thread, I don't even know what the old one means. On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 8:31 AM Bruno Marchal wrote: > *the natural transplant you mention might be the result of an analog, > continuous process. *It would make a difference if all the decimals plays > a role in

Re: A purely relational ontology?

On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 4:15:43 AM UTC+2, Pierz wrote: > > > Of course, a purely relational ontology necessarily involves an infinite > regress of relationships, but it seems to me that we must choose our poison > here - the magic of intrinsic properties, or the infinite regress of only

Re: Eternal return

On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 09:27:49AM -0700, Eva wrote: > Given that time is irreversible, and global entropy always increase: > > 1. In principle, sooner or later, every living system such as human being, or > humanity will be annihilated?  > > 2. In principle, if system is annihilated then it is

Re: Eternal return

Have a look at my paper "The Problem of the Self" for some of your wonders: https://philpeople.org/profiles/cosmin-visan -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send

Re: Eternal return

Time is a quale in consciousness. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on

Re: determinism and randomness in QM

> On 23 Jun 2019, at 12:01, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 3:55:44 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > For logical reason, when we assume the digital mechanist hypothesis, we just > cannot assume more than (very) elementary arithmetic. > > The physical reality, to

Zero-totality

Hello I want to talk with you about Dr. Peter Rowlands works, which I find very fascinating. Here is his talk about foundations od physical laws: https://youtu.be/BGAopIzAjyk Here is paper: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphy.2017.00028/full One of his main idea is that sum of

Eternal return

Given that time is irreversible, and global entropy always increase: 1. In principle, sooner or later, every living system such as human being, or humanity will be annihilated?  2. In principle, if system is annihilated then it is irreversible - a system with the same internal structure may be

Re: Allah: the One and Only Deity

> On 23 Jun 2019, at 13:44, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 6:27:56 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 21 Jun 2019, at 14:38, Philip Thrift > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 6:22:06 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 20 Jun 2019, at

Re: The anecdote of Moon landing

> On 22 Jun 2019, at 13:06, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 8:20:04 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > "Good old classical chance" is just quantifying ignorance. At a fundamental > level there must be either inherent chance, QM, or determinism. > > Brent > > > That's

Re: The anecdote of Moon landing

> On 21 Jun 2019, at 22:24, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List > wrote: > > > > On 6/21/2019 5:50 AM, Bruce Kellett wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 10:35 PM Bruno Marchal > > wrote: >> On 21 Jun 2019, at 09:04, Bruce Kellett > >

Re: The anecdote of Moon landing

> On 21 Jun 2019, at 21:49, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List > wrote: > > > > On 6/21/2019 5:35 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 21 Jun 2019, at 09:04, Bruce Kellett >> > wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 4:26 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List

Re: The anecdote of Moon landing

> On 21 Jun 2019, at 15:57, John Clark wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 7:58 AM Bruno Marchal > wrote: > > > CT might be refuted tomorrow, or in ten thousand years. > > I doubt it. Oracles that can do more than a Turing Machine, such as one that > can solve the

Re: The anecdote of Moon landing

> On 21 Jun 2019, at 15:03, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 10:29 PM Bruno Marchal > wrote: > On 21 Jun 2019, at 08:49, Bruce Kellett > wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 4:26 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List >

Re: The anecdote of Moon landing

> On 21 Jun 2019, at 14:50, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 10:35 PM Bruno Marchal > wrote: > On 21 Jun 2019, at 09:04, Bruce Kellett > wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 4:26 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List >>

Re: Allah: the One and Only Deity

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 6:27:56 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 21 Jun 2019, at 14:38, Philip Thrift > > wrote: > > > > On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 6:22:06 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 20 Jun 2019, at 19:42, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thursday, June 20, 2019

Re: Huh? (was Allah nonsense​)​

> On 23 Jun 2019, at 01:36, spudboy100 via Everything List > wrote: > > If God does not exist, or does exist in a fashion we cannot grasp, or is 3 > people/entities. or is Hindu and many many-we don't get a choice, and nobody > asked us to vote. If you want to honor God, help somebody out >

Re: Allah: the One and Only Deity

> On 23 Jun 2019, at 01:29, spudboy100 via Everything List > wrote: > >> Heh! Bruno, in the USA it's all about money, which is symbolic, or is it? Money is like love and energy. It can be exchanged, it can grows, and it is problematic when you have none. >> The rich buy the politicians

Re: Allah: the One and Only Deity

> On 21 Jun 2019, at 14:38, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 6:22:06 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 20 Jun 2019, at 19:42, Philip Thrift > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thursday, June 20, 2019 at 12:32:20 PM UTC-5, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> On Thursday,

Re: A purely relational ontology?

> On 21 Jun 2019, at 18:18, PGC wrote: > > > > On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 12:56:59 PM UTC+2, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 20 Jun 2019, at 17:20, PGC > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thursday, June 20, 2019 at 3:58:17 PM UTC+2, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> Now that does not make sense to me,

Re: determinism and randomness in QM

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 3:55:44 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > For logical reason, when we assume the digital mechanist hypothesis, we > just cannot assume more than (very) elementary arithmetic. > > The physical reality, to be explained, will need much more than > arithmetic, but it

Re: determinism and randomness in QM

> On 21 Jun 2019, at 00:38, Lawrence Crowell > wrote: > > On Thursday, June 20, 2019 at 8:43:08 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 20 Jun 2019, at 00:26, Lawrence Crowell > > wrote: >> >> On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 6:02:54 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 18 Jun 2019, at