From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR
Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2014 6:37 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [foar] Amoeba's Secret now available in paperback
If my joke works at all, it needs you to take that
On 29 Mar 2014, at 10:24, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 29 March 2014 19:27, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 28 Mar 2014, at 23:41, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 29 March 2014 03:24, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 27 Mar 2014, at 18:21, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 7:44 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, exactly, if we assume that there will be no bad consequences if
continue to pump out pollution, we are indeed betting out lives
You're assuming that the safe and conservative thing to do is to
immediately and radically cut
On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 1:11 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
Back in 2007 the United Nations issued a report on climate change, it
said that by 2100 things would be between 2 and 4.5 degrees warmer than
now, a rather large amount of uncertainty; but after spending millions of
dollars
The economist Tol, from the Netherlands, resigned a few days ago, objecting to
the latest IPCC update exaggerating the negative impacts of GW. He is merely
an economist and not a climate scientist, but I suspect he has nothing to lose
telling the truth. If IPCC/UN was talking ground truth,
On 31 March 2014 04:18, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 7:44 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, exactly, if we assume that there will be no bad consequences if
continue to pump out pollution, we are indeed betting out lives
You're assuming that the safe
On 31 March 2014 04:27, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 1:11 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
Back in 2007 the United Nations issued a report on climate change, it
said that by 2100 things would be between 2 and 4.5 degrees warmer than
now, a rather
Oh, OK, almost said :-) (But he should have!)
What he actually said was something like
We can design a system that is proof against accident and stupidity, but
not one that is proof against deliberate malice.
But I prefer my version TBH.
On 31 March 2014 10:00, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2014 8:19 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Climate models
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 7:44 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, exactly,
Ah, I didn't realise it was a joke. I guess it must be a dig at
commitment-phobia, but I can't seem to twist it into something
funny.
Nevermind.
On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 02:36:39PM +1300, LizR wrote:
If my joke works at all, it needs you to take that quoted line out of
context. (If I understand
On 30 March 2014 17:43, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote:
Ah, I didn't realise it was a joke. I guess it must be a dig at
commitment-phobia, but I can't seem to twist it into something
funny.
Sorry. I will try harder next time.
--
You received this message because you are
Hi everyone:
I am currently interested in two questions:
Does my model of why there are dynamic universes within the Everything
[latest version is below] include Bruno's Comp? Hi Bruno.
If life is inherently self destructive under any reasonable definition of
life [see some of my recent
For those who enjoyed the tour into the Mandelbrot set, there's also:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/week285.html
Brent
--
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
On Sunday, March 30, 2014 10:33:55 PM UTC+1, cdemorsella wrote:
*From:* everyth...@googlegroups.com javascript: [mailto:
everyth...@googlegroups.com javascript:] *On Behalf Of *John Clark
*Sent:* Sunday, March 30, 2014 8:19 AM
*To:* everyth...@googlegroups.com javascript:
*Subject:*
I love the pictures. The maths is, as ever, daunting.
On 31 March 2014 12:22, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
For those who enjoyed the tour into the Mandelbrot set, there's also:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/week285.html
Brent
--
You received this message because you are
On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:01:04 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 25 Mar 2014, at 05:48, ghi...@gmail.com javascript: wrote:
On Monday, March 24, 2014 4:48:13 AM UTC, chris peck wrote:
The only person in any doubt was you wasn't it Liz?
I found Tegmark's presentation very
I'm not sure collapse is an observed fact. Collapse is an assumption which
explains how we come to measure discrete values.
On 31 March 2014 16:27, ghib...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:01:04 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 25 Mar 2014, at 05:48, ghi...@gmail.com wrote:
Looked at them as well. so much emergent complexity from such simple initial
conditions and equations. Beautiful haunting images.
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2014 6:15 PM
To:
18 matches
Mail list logo
