Re: Quantum Foam

2019-09-02 Thread Samiya Illias
This might be of interest: https://islam-qna.blogspot.com/2016/02/back-to-future-why-old-testament-is.html > On 03-Sep-2019, at 5:44 AM, spudboy100 via Everything List > wrote: > > Well, I tend not to disagree with you concerning Islam (The Uma) doing > nothing about the Islamists, so that

Re: Quantum Foam

2019-09-02 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List
Well, I tend not to disagree with you concerning Islam (The Uma) doing nothing about the Islamists, so that Kuffar lives (infidels) don't really matter under Sharia Law; and no we shouldn't opt to live under their Dhimmi Laws, in which we and our grandkids resign ourselves to permanent 2nd or

Re: Quantum Foam

2019-09-02 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List
And so we have! https://www.researchgate.net/publication/294721340_God_is_a_Vacuum_Fluctuation Nyuck Nyuck Nyuck! -Original Message- From: Philip Thrift To: Everything List Sent: Mon, Sep 2, 2019 2:54 am Subject: Re: Quantum Foam On Sunday, September 1, 2019 at 8:34:06 PM UTC-5,

Re: Observation versus assumption

2019-09-02 Thread John Clark
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 7:00 PM Jason Resch wrote: > >> Moving a point? If a physical particle moves from x to y then there is > no longer a particle at x but now there is one at y where there was none > before. > > > *You are assuming past points in time cease to exist.* > I don't know what

Re: Observation versus assumption

2019-09-02 Thread Jason Resch
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 5:19 PM John Clark wrote: > On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 4:42 PM Jason Resch wrote: > > >> *> Is a point moving up in down forever in some time dimension different >> from the sin function sin(t), for all t? * >> > > Moving a point? If a physical particle moves from x to y then

Re: Observation versus assumption

2019-09-02 Thread John Clark
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 4:42 PM Jason Resch wrote: > *> Is a point moving up in down forever in some time dimension different > from the sin function sin(t), for all t? * > Moving a point? If a physical particle moves from x to y then there is no longer a particle at x but now there is one at y

Re: Observation versus assumption

2019-09-02 Thread Jason Resch
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 2:15 PM John Clark wrote: > On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 11:57 AM Bruno Marchal wrote: > > >> > And natural numbers are not machinery and no other sort of number is > either. Machinery needs change and change needs matter. > > You never answered the question I posed regarding

Re: Observation versus assumption

2019-09-02 Thread 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List
On 9/2/2019 8:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Indeed that can be said illustrated from the fact that in string theory, to get the mass of the photon right, we use 1+2+3+4+5+… = -1/12, which is a statement about the prime numbers, just a little bit disguised I'm sure you know that equation

Re: Observation versus assumption

2019-09-02 Thread Philip Thrift
On Monday, September 2, 2019 at 10:57:50 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 1 Sep 2019, at 17:58, John Clark > > wrote: > > > I'm saying there is no such thing as numbers > > > > Explain this to my tax inspector! > > > Bruno > > > But there would be no tax collectors if such people had not

Re: Observation versus assumption

2019-09-02 Thread John Clark
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 11:57 AM Bruno Marchal wrote: >> Yes Euclid said nothing about physics in his proof, but he should have. > A proof is only as good as the assumptions it starts out with and Euclid > assumed physics could be ignored. > > *> That he is not assuming your materialist religion

Re: Observation versus assumption

2019-09-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
> On 1 Sep 2019, at 17:58, John Clark wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 1, 2019 at 8:41 AM Bruno Marchal > wrote: > > > so we agree that Euclid didn’t mention physics, nor any physical > > assumption, in his proof on the prime numbers. > > Yes Euclid said nothing about

Re: Quantum Foam

2019-09-02 Thread Lawrence Crowell
On Sunday, September 1, 2019 at 9:57:43 PM UTC-5, spudb...@aol.com wrote: > > My guess, even if "young Crowell" objects, is that religion confers an > evolutionary advantage to those so, deluded. Thus they, we, breed more > offspring with this psychological trait, whilst the socialists doth >

The Neuroscience of Reality

2019-09-02 Thread Philip Thrift
*Reality is constructed by the brain, and no two brains are exactly alike* By Anil K. Seth (@anilkseth) | Scientific American September 2019 Issue https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-neuroscience-of-reality/ ... The central idea here is that perception is a process of active

Re: Quantum Foam

2019-09-02 Thread Philip Thrift
On Sunday, September 1, 2019 at 8:34:06 PM UTC-5, Lawrence Crowell wrote: > > > > This has gotten a bit off track from quantum fluctuations. > > LC > > The originating Topic 'quantum foam' became 'religious myth'. @philipthrift -- You received this message because you are subscribed