Re: I am not meant for your religion

[EMAIL PROTECTED]; David Woolsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 9:51 AM Subject: Re: I am not meant for your religion snip SPK: We can dismiss the Heisenberg cut without to many problems but we cannot hand wave the categorical distinction between subject and object (Cartesian

Re: I am not meant for your religion

] Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 9:51 AM Subject: Re: I am not meant for your religion snip SPK: We can dismiss the Heisenberg cut without to many problems but we cannot hand wave the categorical distinction between subject and object (Cartesian cut?)! BM: Yes we can! There are a lot of so

Re: I am not meant for your religion

Hi Tim, I never have seen someone so electronically sensitive (except perhaps my french director thesis ... ;-) You know how much I have enjoyed your posts, and you know how many mathematical structures we share the taste for. (categories, modal logic, Baez stuff ...) But, indeed, apparently we

Re: I am not meant for your religion

I have to agree with Tim May, this list was not a good fit for him. So I am not going to join the chorus of voices appealing for him to return. There are plenty of forums on the net to discuss all sorts of matters, and if a list is not a good match for a person, there's no point in trying to make

RE: I am not meant for your religion

Tim, if you're leaving the list it's a shame; as a lurker I've particularly enjoyed your posts... -- Ben Goertzel I'll miss some tidbits of math I discussed with some of you, but I won't miss the rest. Until we meet in another reality, --Tim May

Re: I am not meant for your religion

I am sorry to see Tim leave. We certainly need a multi-sided discussion and some of his latest post were interesting in his challenge of the concept of Quantum Suicide. However he did not convince me he was right - I remain an agnostic - and quitting in the middle of a good discussion is poor