What about the waste tails he alludes to. I had not known that they had
actually constructed and tested U233 bombs - had always thought it was a
hypothetical problem rather than an actual and supposedly - according to
this article - a tested device. His point also that U233 does not need an
2014-05-20 8:28 GMT+02:00 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com:
What about the waste tails he alludes to. I had not known that they had
actually constructed and tested U233 bombs – had always thought it was a
hypothetical problem rather than an actual and
On 20 May 2014 17:55, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
The theory is invented, the maths is discovered.
I'd say they're both invented. How could one discover F=k/r^a out in the
world? Of course if you include your brain as a place to discover things
then there ceases to be much
falsification is a susceptible to circularity, since the data must be
interpreted ever under a theory. that theory is the one that we want
to test. So a nascent science can be circular at the first stages and
then can grow to predict a fact , previously unknown that demonstrates
that another is
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 2:21 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 4:56 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 9:33 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 11:31 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:09 PM, meekerdb
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:13 AM, ghib...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 12:35:47 AM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:40 PM, ghi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, May 19, 2014 6:24:45 PM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM,
On 19 May 2014, at 19:06, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote:
His main interest is the mind-body problem; and my interest in that
problem is more from an engineering viewpoint. What does it take
to make a conscious machine and what are the advantages or
disadvantages of
On 19 May 2014, at 19:59, meekerdb wrote:
Maybe Bruno would like to train an entry.
LOL.
Well, poor amoebas. They are social, but forcing them to race is a bit
exaggerating imo :)
Bruno
Brent
Original Message
http://www.nature.com/news/the-game-is-on-1.15167
--
On 19 May 2014, at 20:14, ghib...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, May 19, 2014 7:26:40 AM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2014, at 21:16, ghi...@gmail.com wrote:
Does this computer architecture assume not-comp?
No. Elementary arithmetic emulates n-synchronized oscillators for
all n,
On 19 May 2014, at 20:40, ghib...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, May 19, 2014 6:24:45 PM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb meek...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote:
His main interest is the mind-body problem; and my interest in that
On 19 May 2014, at 20:47, ghib...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, May 19, 2014 7:40:35 PM UTC+1, ghi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, May 19, 2014 6:24:45 PM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb meek...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote:
His
On 19 May 2014, at 21:33, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/19/2014 11:31 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:09 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 5/19/2014 10:24 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 5/19/2014
On Monday, May 19, 2014 2:13:31 AM UTC+1, Brent wrote:
On 5/18/2014 5:40 PM, LizR wrote:
On 17 May 2014 10:06, John Mikes jam...@gmail.com javascript: wrote:
Dear Liz, thanks for your care to reflect upon my text and I apologize for
my LATE REPLY.
You ask about my opinion on
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Quentin Anciaux
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 11:49 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Thorium: the wonder fuel that wasn't
2014-05-20 8:28 GMT+02:00 'Chris de Morsella'
2014-05-20 17:55 GMT+02:00 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com:
*From:* everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:
everything-list@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Quentin Anciaux
*Sent:* Monday, May 19, 2014 11:49 PM
*To:*
I look forward to your comments each day. And I try to respond the best I can.
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 4:37 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: TRONNIES
On 20 May
On 5/19/2014 11:48 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
These are valid criticisms that are very much not administrative nature but cut right to
the core [pun intended] of a world in which a multitude of thorium U233 breeder reactors
proliferate widely. There is a risk that this unintentionally leads to
On 20 May 2014, at 02:21, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/19/2014 4:56 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 9:33 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 5/19/2014 11:31 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:09 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On
On 20 May 2014, at 04:35, Russell Standish wrote:
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 01:12:20PM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything
List wrote:
Accordingto Deutsch, MWI is falsifiable, with some actions of a
quantum computer. These would be the heavy hitters of QC, and not
the lab toys we have today,
On 5/20/2014 6:22 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 2:21 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 4:56 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 9:33 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
On 5/20/2014 7:28 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
The implications might be the abandon of materialism, which is good, as it is a person
eliminativist position.
Then the machine's theology provides a vaccine against the reductionist conception of
numbers, machines and a fortiori humans.
The main
2014-05-20 18:44 GMT+02:00 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net:
On 5/19/2014 11:48 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
These are valid criticisms that are very much not administrative nature
but cut right to the core [pun intended] of a world in which a multitude of
thorium U233 breeder reactors
Chris, Brent and other Th-savants: (I am not one)
Whatever radiates is suspect to me. Humans' world is vulnerable.
Bombs? We must WANT peace very much (si vis pacem, para bellum).
Suppose: someone discovers a 'good'way to make a Th-bomb (a different route
from the old one) - on historical examples
ghibbsa: falsification, testing, calculating and the entire kaboodle of our
scientific (?) handling is restricted to the PRESENTLY knowable. More than
yesterday's and most likely less than tomorrow's.
Whatever we conclude is a time-cut fragment what we consider the
'achievable' truth.
Although we
On Monday, May 19, 2014 2:40:54 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2014, at 21:37, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sunday, May 18, 2014 1:56:48 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2014, at 17:43, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Free Will Universe Model: Non-computability and its
On Sunday, May 18, 2014 9:59:10 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote:
On 19 May 2014 07:37, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com javascript:wrote:
You did not provide evidence that they cannot do that.
His evidence was the negative answer to Hilbert's 10th problem.
To be exact, it's claimed to be
On Sunday, May 18, 2014 10:53:57 PM UTC-4, Russell Standish wrote:
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 07:01:01PM -0700, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sunday, May 18, 2014 9:34:40 PM UTC-4, Russell Standish wrote:
This doesn't follow. An evolutionary algorithm with a real random
source, can
On 5/20/2014 11:45 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2014-05-20 18:44 GMT+02:00 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net:
On 5/19/2014 11:48 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
These are valid criticisms that are very much not administrative nature but
cut
right to the core
I haven't got much further as yet, so I'm not sure that there will be
daily comments. However I did notice that one of your basic units is an e+
and an e- charged particle orbitting each other, which looks to me rather
like positronium https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positronium (except that I
--
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 email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to
I am bowing out of this conversation. Obviously from many examples, Brent
thinks that we invent maths whenever we work out something like
elliptical orbits result from an inverse square law. This is an incorrect
use of invent, IMHO, or it's at best using it in the sense that whoever
it was
On 21 May 2014 06:24, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/20/2014 7:28 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
The implications might be the abandon of materialism, which is good, as it
is a person eliminativist position.
Then the machine's theology provides a vaccine against the reductionist
On 5/20/2014 4:07 PM, LizR wrote:
On 21 May 2014 06:24, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/20/2014 7:28 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
The implications might be the abandon of materialism, which is good, as it
is a
person eliminativist position.
My understanding is that positronium is an electron and a positron orbiting
together. Both of these particles are self-propelled so as long as they have
enough speed they can orbit. If they somehow lose their speeds or otherwise
get very close together they will annihilate each other and
On 21 May 2014 12:35, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
Only 1% of the world views, and specifically as they bear on ethics and
morals - which is where Bruno thinks the person centered view will be a
big paradigm shift.
OK, in that sense I agree. I also have doubts about Bruno's views on
You haven't answered my main question. Is the 2-tronnie system classical,
in which case my next question is how does it avoid instability? Or is it
quantised, and in its ground state? (in which case I agree that there is no
energy to radiate).
On 21 May 2014 13:09, John Ross
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 06:09:43PM -0700, John Ross wrote:
The Coulomb force between the two tronnies in the entron, if they were
stationary would be F = k QQ/r squared. But when we integrate the force
around the circle the integrated force becomes F(I) = k QQ/r. The attractive
and
37 matches
Mail list logo
