Interesting, but from the point of view of the interview, this would be 
cheating. If such sophisticated form of comp is justified, then by the 
UDA reasoning, it has to be justified by the lobian machine. If it is 
the case that such move is proposed by the lobian machine, I will let 
you know.


Le 25-août-06, à 17:07, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :

> Thanks Bruno, for accepting my position about atheists. You just did 
> not add
> that 'this is why I don't call myself an atheist'.
> Theology is well thought of in your explanation, however IMO it 
> carries too
> much historical baggage (garbage?) since ~500AD to "renew" peoples' 
> thinking
> about the meaning of the term.
> *
> One question to the "math-teach(er)":
> you pressed the 'integers' as the basis of your number-world.
> How about if we consider from the excellent explanation I read 
> recently on
> this list about 'string theory origins': to consider the "inside the 
> circle"
> equivalents of the 'points' (numbers) outside the circle,  - which are 
> the
> integers - AS THE INTEGERS??? (and call the reciprocals 'inside the 
> circle'
> as our integers?)
>  would that change the status of the world? Encased in the circle?
> (That would be a definitely human-manipulated image).
> You could freely apply all your theories on that, too.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to