Le 25-févr.-06, à 21:03, uv wrote:


> "Bruno Marchal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said on  February 25, 2006,
> amongst a lot of other things
>
>> The practical, terrestrial act of faith consists to say "yes"
>> to a surgeon which proposes you an artificial digital brain/body.
>> It is a belief in a form or reincarnation.
>
> I really think there would be a lot to do before your theories are
> sufficiently polished to be acceptable to even say a semi-lay
> audience of Uni degree standing.



Are you talking of the Universal Dovetailer Argument (one half of my 
work) or of the interview of the lobian machine (the second half)?
In case you have still problem with the UDA don't hesitate to tell me 
which step of the reasoning makes a problem.
In case you are talking on the lobian interview, then ... I don't know. 
Many people have problem with elementary logic, including sometimes 
mathematicians. Just logic is not well known and suffers from lasting 
prejudice in most civilsation. Probably logic is an hard subject.




> But the basic concepts may be
> there with Smullyan's and Godel's ideas, ...


For the lobian interview the basic idea are all there. But it would not 
make sense in the "TOE research" without a good understanding of the 
mind body problem and the conceptual problem of Quantum Mechanics, at 
least for serious motivation issues.




> ... though I would spice it
> up with Chaitin,


I like very much the work of Chaitin, but from "Conscience et 
Mécanisme" to the Lille thesis I have decided not to distracted the 
reader with the work of Chaitin, independently that our approach goes 
well all along together.




> Gadamer etc. I think it may be of more benefit to
> you than the readers.
>
> If only you could descend to the Betty Shine level (wonderful)
> without totally infuriating any academic readers, you could
> seriously have a best seller.
>
> The point is, Penrose was so wrong he just annoyed everyone,



Not me. Penrose "wrongness", as the older "Lucas' wrongness" can 
inspire important corrections. Lucas give rise indirectly to the very 
relevant work of Judson Webb (*), and Lucas' one give rise to the 
Benacerraf paper (**) and its sequel including my own work.
Of course Penrose, which is a big mathematician and physician, has made 
physicists (if not mathematicians) still more timid on Godel's results.





> and got a knighthood. Can't you be totally awful, causing fury
> but not contempt?


Perhaps you could be more precise? Why do you want me to cause fury? I 
mean, I know that "my theory" goes against the general naturalist 
(aristotelian) paradigm.
But I don't  propose it as a truth, just an approach which put both QM 
and the mind-body problem in a "new" light. I put "new" in quotes, 
because that light belongs to the Plato family kind of lightning. It is 
made even clearer by Plotinus.




> Just trying to help. I should not put it like
> this, but people like David Peat have convinced a few people
> (maybe such people could help you with the writing) but I
> see you as more as Betty Shine. Her books had a lot of
> (relevant) photos of calming things and it DID work for
> her marvellously. Best Luck anyway.


Thanks. You remind me Bruno Poizat, one of the actual most brilliant 
french logician. He never succeeds to publish his french books (but by 
himself), even the one where he puts pictures of quasi-naked woman 
inside (!) (a book on advanced logic applied to algebra). Now his old 
"Model Theory" has been published in english by Springer and is the 
best book available on the subject today, imo.

Bruno

(*) WEBB J. C., 1980, Mechanism, Mentalism and Metamathematics : An 
essay on Finitism, D. Reidel Pub. Company, Dordrecht, Holland.
(**) BENACERRAF P., 1967, God, the Devil, and Gödel, The monist, vol 
51, n° 1, pp 9-32.

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to