you (of all people) underestimate human optimism and self confidence. "MY
THEORY"? the 'others' maybe, they become proven wrong and false, not mine!
Then again where is an acceptable evidence? to whom?
Ask Goedel, ask Popper, ask all people who 'think' differently.
Bruno has different evidence for his position in his reply to my question
today than I had when I asked it.
Not even a (confirmed?) "Pysical"experiment is 'evidendce'. wHO do you call
a 'scientist'? the one who accepts an evidence, or who does not?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stathis Papaioannou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "John M" <email@example.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2006 7:22 AM
Subject: RE: Bruno's argument - Comp
John M writes:
> Earlier we lived in a telephone central switchboard, further back in a
> steam-engine. Not to mention the Turtle.
> The 'cat' specifies IMO ignorance without prejudice.
Very droll, very true! But what, then, must we do? Scientists come up with
best theory consistent with the evidence, with a willingness to revise the
in the light of new evidence. They might not be quite as willing as they
should be, but that's just human nature, and they all come around to doing
right thing eventually. It would not be very helpful if we all thought, "I
whatever theory I come up with will almost certainly be proved wrong given
time, so I won't bother coming up with a theory at all."
> > I recently read somebody's speculation that the reality we inhabit is
> > may
> > be
> > a quantum computer. Presumably when we observe Schrodinger's cat
> > simultaneously being killed and not killed, we are observing the quantum
> > computer in action.
> > Norman Samish
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "John M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 2:05 PM
> > Subject: Re: Bruno's argument - Comp
> >> To All:
> >> I know my questions below are beyond our comprehension, but we read
> >> (and
> >> write) so much about this idea that I feel compelled to ask:
> >> is there any idea why there would be 'comp'? our computers require
> >> juice
> >> to
> >> work and if unplugged they represent a very expensive paperweight.
> >> What kind of "computing unit" (universe? multiverse, or some other
> >> satanic
> >> 'verse') would run by itself without being supplied by something that
> >> moves
> >> it? I hate to ask about its program as well, whether it is an
> >> "intelligent
> >> design"?
> >> Is it a pseudnym for some godlike mystery?
> >> Are we reinventing the religion?
> >> John Mikes
Be one of the first to try Windows Live Mail.
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/409 - Release Date: 8/4/2006
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at