On 27 Dec 2008, at 20:50, Günther Greindl wrote:
I agree with Bruno that all empirical evidence in this universe
suggest
that CT = PCT. But this need not be so, in a logical sense.
Indeed. UDA shows that PCT is a mysterious, if not *the* mystery with
CT. Logicaly, and a priori, CT
Hi Tom,
On 27 Dec 2008, at 22:50, Tom Caylor wrote:
Bruno,
Just coming at this after not thinking about it much.
Good method :)
Sometimes
that's an advantage, but sometimes it results in forgetting pertinent
points that were understood before.
As a math teacher, I know perfectly
Hal,
Is there a pattern to how the system responds to its own
incompleteness? You say that there is not a pattern to the traces, but
what do you mean by that?
It sounds to me like what you are describing is some version of an
inconsistent set theory that is somehow trying to repair itself.
Bruno, you have strong (and likable) arguments from *your* point of view. I
would like to say *NO* to the doctor, because a digital brain is but a
reduction, from all that what I seek as whatever 'nature' (the world?) can
provide. I don't know what, I call it 'analogue' - beyond those tools
Hi Abram:
I have interlaced responses with - symbols.
Original Message-
From: everything-l...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-l...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Abram Demski
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2008 3:10 PM
To: everything-l...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Revisions
5 matches
Mail list logo
