She is at Smith College. Go for it
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 5:00 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 December 2014 at 20:00, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
That's the slide I meant. The first item has to do with the (mostly )
elderly who get serious dementia
and essentially
You can do your own research.
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 7:15 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11 December 2014 at 11:34, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
She is at Smith College. Go for it
If that's the only response to a request for peer-reviewed papers, I think
we can say
this forward, presumably you've done some research
on it, why should I have to duplicate it?
You obviously don't have anything here, I'm sorry I bothered to be open
minded about it since you're clearly just a charlatan.
On 11 December 2014 at 14:28, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
You can
-- Forwarded message --
From: richard ruquist yann...@yahoo.com
Date: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 9:26 AM
Subject: Consciousness
To: Swines swi...@yahoogroups.com,
achristianvsatheistc...@yahoogroups.com
achristianvsatheistc...@yahoogroups.com, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
https
Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
-- Forwarded message --
From: richard ruquist yann...@yahoo.com
Date: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 9:26 AM
Subject: Consciousness
To: Swines swi...@yahoogroups.com,
achristianvsatheistc...@yahoogroups.com
achristianvsatheistc...@yahoogroups.com
Message-
From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 6:04 pm
Subject: Re: Consciousness
Sounds interesting. I wish I had an hour to watch it. I don't suppose
there's a summary? :-)
On 10 December 2014 at 03:36, Richard Ruquist
I do not doubt that increased CO2 in the atm causes global warming
and that nowadays much of it comes from burning fossil fuels.
Yet my opinion of the Vostok ice core data is that
when global temperatures got to their present levels,
rapid global warming abruptly turned into less rapid global
On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Hi Richard,
On 07 Dec 2014, at 15:16, Richard Ruquist wrote:
Bruno,
You seem to be arguing that the total energy in the multiverse is a
constant.
Is that so?
I think indeed, assuming QM (without collapse
Bruno,
You seem to be arguing that the total energy in the multiverse is a
constant.
Is that so?
Richard
On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 6:20 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 06 Dec 2014, at 12:59, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 3:19 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 3:19 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 05 Dec 2014, at 20:04, Richard Ruquist wrote:
What I want to know is if anyone takes conservation of energy seriously?
Yes. Quantum mechanics without collapse does not violate the conservation
of energy. You just
What I want to know is if anyone takes conservation of energy seriously?
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 1:49 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 12/5/2014 8:20 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 8:06 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 12/4/2014 8:05 PM, LizR wrote:
John,
Experimental results at several high-energy colliders suggest that at some
point in the big bang the universe was a quark-gluon plasma, which despite
it's high energy, is a BEC where all the particles share the same wave
function- so they say. It seems to me that if all particles in the
I posted a reference here that suggested how distant black holes could
become correlated.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1308.0289v1.pdf
Richard
On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 9:07 PM, zibb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, December 1, 2014 1:48:35 AM UTC, Liz R wrote:
OK, I'm just curious to knowI don't
I have read that reference. It is obvious that you have not.
But then almost everything you post here is baloney.
So it may not matter if you read the paper or not.
Richard
On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 9:25 PM, zibb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, December 1, 2014 2:14:33 AM UTC, yanniru wrote:
I
That is exactly the same kind of correlation that Motl, Gharibyon, Penna
and I are talking about.
It is a form of cosmic entanglement.
However, if you recall I extrapolated from GP's paper that black holes
must be intelligent to be monogamus.
And in a post to Bruno I speculated the particle wave
Zibby,
They may be interested, but they cannot publish such an interest and put
their careers at risk.
It is only emeritus types like myself that can put such speculations in
print.
What they can publish is the math behind the limited conclusion.
David Deutsch is the exception.
Zappy
On Sun,
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 3:15 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Richard,
On 28 Nov 2014, at 19:19, Richard Ruquist wrote:
It occurred to me that if consciousness is entirely classical- no quantum
effects- then perhaps consciousness on occurs in one world. Or in general
if most
Bruno,
It occurred to me that if consciousness is entirely classical- no quantum
effects- then perhaps consciousness on occurs in one world. Or in general
if most natural processes are classical, then we are mostly in one world,
maybe with a little fuzziness.
Richard
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at
I have wondered if space is expanding by adding on more space, keeping the
space of say our galaxy intact.
Or is the actual space within our galaxy getting bigger, along with each of
us.
And if the latter, how would we know.?
Richard
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Bruce Kellett
It may just be herding instinct or projection on my part,
but it seems that my chickens are more intelligent
as a group than individually.
I attribute that to a group mind due to entanglement
in a mind/matter duality.
Richard
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au
:46 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 25 Nov 2014, at 17:54, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 7:17 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 24 Nov 2014, at 16:58, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 2:08 AM, Bruce Kellett bhkell...@optusnet.com.au
wrote:
meekerdb wrote:
ISTM there are two ways of looking at it. In one you say before the
event there were several possibilities x,y,z,... with probabilites
a,b,c,... and one of them, x, happened. The energy before
The article was about the bad fit.
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 5:58 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 25 November 2014 at 11:53, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
The continuing tests have been done. The results are in. That is what the
article is about.
I only saw references
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 7:17 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 24 Nov 2014, at 16:58, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 24 Nov 2014, at 11:35, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 4:05 AM, Bruno
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 4:05 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 23 Nov 2014, at 18:11, Richard Ruquist wrote:
Bruno: I doubt a photon needs to double his energy to go through two
slits
Richard: You should be ashamed
That's hardly an argument.
Agreed
Einstein already
MWI renormalization is just a snooker.
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 6:51 AM, zibb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, November 23, 2014 9:52:23 AM UTC, Bruce wrote:
LizR wrote:
On 22 November 2014 09:31, Richard Ruquist yan...@gmail.com
mailto:yan...@gmail.com wrote:
Collapse is necessary
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 24 Nov 2014, at 11:35, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 4:05 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 23 Nov 2014, at 18:11, Richard Ruquist wrote:
Bruno: I doubt a photon needs to double his
Isn't this news a few months old?
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 2:05 PM, zibb...@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.space.com/27852-dark-energy-eating-dark-matter.html
my comment is testimony. my worldview predicted this. honest.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Bruce Kellett bhkell...@optusnet.com.au
wrote:
Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 24 Nov 2014, at 11:35, Richard Ruquist wrote:
With MWI thinking, every detector will detect a photon at the same
energy and frequency as the original photon but in a different world. So
Wrong. Renormalization multiples the total energy in the multiverse.
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Bruce Kellett bhkell...@optusnet.com.au
wrote:
Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Bruce Kellett bhkell...@optusnet.com.au
mailto:bhkell...@optusnet.com.au wrote
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 5:42 PM, Bruce Kellett bhkell...@optusnet.com.au
wrote:
Richard Ruquist wrote:
Wrong. Renormalization multiples the total energy in the multiverse.
I can do no more than refer you to Frank Wilczek:
http://frankwilczek.com/2013/multiverseEnergy01.pdf
Excerpt
The continuing tests have been done. The results are in. That is what the
article is about.
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 5:32 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
Shouldn't this be testable? If DM is disappearing then galaxies should be
expanding as there is less mass holding them together, surely?
If Feynman could renormalize, why can't MWIers(;)
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 4:52 AM, Bruce Kellett bhkell...@optusnet.com.au
wrote:
LizR wrote:
On 22 November 2014 09:31, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com mailto:
yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Collapse is necessary if you wish to conserve
Yes, and as the branches multiply, so does the energy.
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 3:52 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 21 November 2014 23:07, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
It seems, yes. In our branch. But not in the physical reality as a
whole, where information and energy
Bruno: I doubt a photon needs to double his energy to go through two slits
Richard: You should be ashamed
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 23 Nov 2014, at 12:32, Richard Ruquist wrote:
Yes, and as the branches multiply, so does the energy.
I
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 4:38 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 20 Nov 2014, at 12:53, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 6:04 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
Ah! You don't think that the collapse in one universe, creates
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 4:52 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 20 Nov 2014, at 19:10, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 20 Nov 2014, at 01:03, Russell Standish wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 11:06:47AM -0500
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 7:02 AM, zibb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, November 17, 2014 11:49:06 AM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 16 Nov 2014, at 20:32, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List wrote:
Interesting speculative physics… that makes claims that parallel worlds
may be testable.
You are right. My racewalking buddy and college classmate, a Doctor
Professor (retired) on the Yale Medical School faculty,
is engaged in Big Data regarding reading tissue data as to whether it is
carcinogenic. Right now that is entirely done by visual inspection of
doctors using their personal
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 2:05 PM, zibb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, November 21, 2014 12:40:11 PM UTC, yanniru wrote:
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 7:02 AM, zib...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, November 17, 2014 11:49:06 AM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 16 Nov 2014, at 20:32, 'Chris de
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 6:04 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
Ah! You don't think that the collapse in one universe, creates one, in
which the information is preserved? Not uncovers one, splits of a new
clone, like an amoeba does. Perhaps there are
It seems that information is conserved in an MWI Math Space
where every possibility is known ahead of time;
whereas information is created, but energy conserved
in in a wave-collapse physical space.
On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 7:59 AM, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com
Space
where every possibility is known ahead of time;
whereas information is created, but energy conserved
in in a wave-collapse physical space.
-Original Message-
From: Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thu, Nov 20, 2014 8
On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 19 Nov 2014, at 19:43, Richard Ruquist wrote:
In MWI it is rather difficult to reverse time and unsplit the universe.
The mutiverse is only the quantum configuration space taken seriously.
The SWE describe all
On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 20 Nov 2014, at 01:03, Russell Standish wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 11:06:47AM -0500, Richard Ruquist wrote:
The collapse hypothesis is correct if we need to conserve the total
energy
and information
statistical-mechanical ensembles arise naturally from quantum
entanglement
http://people.physics.anu.edu.au/~tas110/Teaching/Lectures/L5/Material/Lloyd06.pdf
a lecture given by Seth Lloyd
QUANTUM THERMODYNAMICS
Excuse our ignorance
Classically, the second law of thermodynamics implies that our
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 5:12 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 19 Nov 2014, at 05:18, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/18/2014 4:57 PM, LizR wrote:
On 19 November 2014 06:45, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 11/18/2014 5:00 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 17 Nov 2014, at 21:13,
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 6:40 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 18 Nov 2014, at 18:34, John Clark wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Maybe Schrodinger's Wave Equation doesn't interfere either, only other
worlds do,
?
!
and maybe the wave
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 19 Nov 2014, at 17:06, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 6:40 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 18 Nov 2014, at 18:34, John Clark wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 Bruno Marchal marc
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 19 Nov 2014, at 16:44, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 5:12 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 19 Nov 2014, at 05:18, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/18/2014 4:57 PM, LizR wrote:
On 19
In MWI it is rather difficult to reverse time and unsplit the universe.
It's not Hermitian
Richard
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:40 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 12:06 AM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au
wrote:
I'd say that by about 1850 when people
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:25 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 19 Nov 2014, at 18:41, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 19 Nov 2014, at 17:06, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 6:40 AM, Bruno
You cannot really believe that coherency controls your life.??
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:56 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
wrote:
In MWI it is rather difficult to reverse time and unsplit the universe
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com
wrote:
As Nicolás Gómez Dávila said (more or less): The modern man indulge
itself thinking that he is a mechanism, but protest loudly when he
On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 6:31 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 15 Nov 2014, at 17:02, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
wrote:
Along these lines of thought, the universe splitting or differentiation
in MWI is said
The Hamiltonian for the process of de
On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 12:27 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au
wrote:
The Multiverse equivalent of conservation of energy is unitarity of the
evolution of
Russell's 'nothing/everything duality' reminds me of one mechanism in
string theory
by which a nearly Planck scale point reflects the entire outside universe
within itself in a r-1/r transformation, that point being each Calabi_yau
compact manifold.
Richard
On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 5:19 PM,
Zipsey,
If you care to understand how black communicate with each other, read
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1308.0289v1.pdf.
clem
On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 4:46 PM, zibb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, November 15, 2014 9:36:57 PM UTC, zib...@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, November 15, 2014 4:57:14
zibbsey,
Same here. I hypothesize a collection of intelligent black holes can
communicate with each other over classical bridges, but only one bridge at
a time per black hole.. Well really it takes two black holes to focus
their entanglement entropy EEin on each other or on the same
, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
wrote:
It has been proven that entangled BECs can transfer information
instantly or at least so much faster than the speed of light that time
delay cannot be detected.
That is incorrect. It's true that somethings can travel faster than light
but information
In other words you do not know
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:33 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, I will accept that information cannot be communicated faster than
the speed of light. However, even in single particle
Along these lines of thought, the universe splitting or differentiation in
MWI is said to be irreversible
even though the equation of QM are time reversible. That might account for
the arrow of time.
Of course wave collapse is also irreversible and is similar to MWI to that
extent.
On Fri, Nov
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au
wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 01:33:15PM -0500, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, I will accept that information cannot be communicated faster than
the
speed
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au
wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 05:14:24PM -0500, Richard Ruquist wrote:
But QM equations are time reversible, The differentiation of the universe
is not
Your point being?
Differentiation may not be unitary
I think that string theory explains the weirdness of quantum theory.
A basic feature of string theory is that a number of dimensions
curl up into ultra-fine particles of space called Calabi-Yau Manifolds CYMs.
Being an array rigid particles in space,
we hypothesize that they form a Bose-Einstein
Random Image Experiment Reveals The Building Blocks of Human Imagination
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/arXivblog/~3/unyAKuGka7E/?utm_source=feedburnerutm_medium=email
-- Forwarded message --
From: richard ruquist yann...@yahoo.com
Date: Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 10:32 AM
Subject: Fw
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 2:37 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 10/31/2014 7:50 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 30 Oct 2014, at 19:52, Richard Ruquist wrote:
I envision wave functions as empty shells that can be filled with energy.
Why not particles? But then you are heading
Peter Sas needs an education in physics.
He came to the right place.
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 6:10 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
I thought the electromagnetic force was mediated by the exchange of
photons (or virtual photons). Does that involve any forces that aren't
attractive/repusive at
What- a delayed post eraser suggesting self-interference is extant(;)
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 7:12 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
you can delete your posts (I think?)
On 30 October 2014 12:07, zibb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, October 29, 2014 11:03:01 PM UTC, zib...@gmail.com
Magnetic forces are neither attractive nor repulsive.
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Peter Sas peterjacco...@gmail.com wrote:
Photons are bosons, mediator particles The bosons mediate the forces
between the fermions, the building pieces of matter... I guess what I wanna
know is this:
-- Forwarded message --
From: richard ruquist yann...@yahoo.com
Date: Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 10:32 AM
Subject: Neural Turing Machine
To: Swines swi...@yahoogroups.com,
achristianvsatheistc...@yahoogroups.com
achristianvsatheistc...@yahoogroups.com, Thoretical_physics Yahoogroups
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 30 Oct 2014, at 13:08, Richard Ruquist wrote:
What- a delayed post eraser suggesting self-interference is extant(;)
Glad you see the problem. I knew I couldn't be the only one :)
Well, if QM is really 100% correct
, at 23:18, LizR wrote:
On 28 October 2014 10:56, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
But the span of infinity is outside spacetime.
I would say it's an abstract property of certain mathematical systems (or
something similar). If GR is right and spacetime is a continuum
Been there. Done that. Dementia comes from sleep deprivation due to ... too
many details.
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 4:53 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 30 October 2014 09:14, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes to both questions. String theory treats spacetime as a continuum
:14, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
My simple-minded view of MWI is that it is deterministic and if it is
true then my consciousness is an illusion, period
Not necessarily your consciousness, you can be aware of things in a
deterministic universe surely? But probably your free
I have not seen any discussion of what Bruno calls the Gaussian nature of
comp or MWI with which he claims that his beliefs in this universe are not
found in the negative in other universes of the multiverse. I referred to
this as the GWI of reality and suggested that it might be consistent with
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 27 Oct 2014, at 13:05, Richard Ruquist wrote:
I have not seen any discussion of what Bruno calls the Gaussian nature of
comp or MWI with which he claims that his beliefs in this universe are not
found
But the span of infinity is outside spacetime.
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 5:44 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 28 October 2014 10:18, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
Sent from AOL Mobile Mail
That! My friend is an ex-parrot. I didn't come here
My simple-minded view of MWI is that it is deterministic and if it is true
then my consciousness is an illusion, period
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 10:10 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 6:38 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
So far the only real
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:50 AM, Peter Sas peterjacco...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I'm not a physicists but a philosopher, so I cannot give a
physicist's answer. My approach is to start with the most fundamental
question (Why is there anything at all?) and then see how far we can get
with pure
Brent,
That is certainly true for Schrodinger's equations,
but is it also true for matrix theory?
Re: real and complex numbers.
Richard
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 1:30 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 10/21/2014 8:05 PM, LizR wrote:
On 22 October 2014 08:40, Russell Standish
Peter,
Could you elaborate on how Dark Energy fits into your thesis?
Richard
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:33 AM, Peter Sas peterjacco...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi guys,
Here is a blog piece I wrote about nothing as the ultimate source of being:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 9:24 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 19 Oct 2014, at 21:14, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
Very well, and now we go to the primal. I am presuming, but who wrote the
programs for computationalism,
I guess you mean who wrote the programs for the
Likewise, the most interesting aspects of string theory are outside the
purview of explanations that can be tested in any even vaguely obvious
direct, empirical manner. and they may form the basis of MUH.
http://vixra.org/abs/1303.0194
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 11:35 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 18 Oct 2014, at 13:02, Richard Ruquist wrote:
Bruno: Then by the ONE, I mean God, in the greek sense of whatever is
needed to have a reality and consciousness.
Richard: If MWI can be derived from comp
Liz,
I am not sure that you can call the underpinning physical. But you
certainly have a good point.
According to one string theory, what seems to exist before the creation of
the universe are dimensions and flux, and symmetries and quantum theory. At
the big-bang some of the dimensions inflate
Bruno: Then by the ONE, I mean God, in the greek sense of whatever is
needed to have a reality and consciousness.
Richard: If MWI can be derived from comp and if the MWI is deterministic,
then IMO there is no need for consciousness.
I claim that a reality and consciousness , that is a single
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:17 AM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 5:18 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
there was no one around in the big bang that we know of, yet it would
appear any maths that might be involved in physical processes managed to
work OK.
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 11:28 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 10/15/2014 7:25 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 4:00 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
Bruno seems to think that if you fail to believe in the existence of
Santa Claus you must
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 14-Oct-2014, at 5:03 am, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com wrote:
If the Quran has told Muslims to put terror into the hearts of the
unbelievers
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 8:37 AM, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 14-Oct-2014, at 3:28 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 12 Oct 2014, at 18:33, Samiya Illias wrote:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 9:15 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 10 Oct 2014, at
If the universe is a toroid as predicted by string theory, then the
universe has on center
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:40 AM, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 2:05 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
Are We Really Conscious?
By MICHAEL S. A. GRAZIANO
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy
multiplecit...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 8:20 PM, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hmm. Please read this blogpost and let me know if this meets your
'demonstrating
factual accuracy in this sense here, of
I worship nature. Is it not made of matter?
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 2:53 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
But it's pejorative to refer to it as god. Nobody worships matter.
Physics textbooks don't have moral prescriptions derived from QED. To call
it god is to give into Bruno's desire to
Nobody worships matter
But many worship nature.
I do not see much difference.
Richard
On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 4:55 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 10/3/2014 10:20 AM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List wrote:
A lot of evidence for some God (like the god Matter), is not a
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 7:09 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 9/26/2014 1:14 AM, Russell Standish wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 03:17:07AM +0200, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:03 AM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au
wrote:
Well done for
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
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
This list contains a number of opposites, people I mean, as exemplified by
John and Kim.
Yet the opposites in their own way are very knowledgeable and
sophisticated, far more than I,
I am afraid, which is why I am reluctant to post here very often.
But my point is that we all should learn to
Of course it is true. But it may nobe the only kind of consciosness
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 8:24 PM, 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
1 - 100 of 896 matches
Mail list logo
