Hi, Hal:
and you really think there would be an end? Look at this list with allegedly
like-minded chaps and no end of picking on 'everything'. Include
"like-minded" lists - meaning 'unlike' really - and the internet would fill
Does it make a difference to argue here, or at another site?
Our (meaning the potential scientific crowd) views are so diversified (what
a nice expression for 'underdeveloped') with diverse angles to look at it
FROM, that a wider agreement is IMO hopeless. Even with the reason of 'a'
George Levy's clarity. I introduced this list to a friend from another list
(complexity) who is math-phys minded and his refusal came: these guys are
'too' Platonistic for me.
I think Jason's idea is great, if he can do it we will have a  maybe wider
sortiment of ideas, I doubt a possibility of crystallized-out agreed upon
identifications. But I am a skeptic.
Best regards

On 2/7/07, Hal Ruhl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  Hi John:
> I think the idea before was to provide an acronym list and also give each
> person or like minded group a limit of a few pages in the FAQ document in
> which to present a summary of their point of view.
> Hal Ruhl
> At 11:59 AM 2/7/2007, you wrote:
> Hal:
> you really believe that anybody could provide responses acceptable for all
> others? (I did not say understandable")
> Everybody sits in his own mindset and speaks his own scientific religion
> (=scientific belief system) - [said so, whether I aggraveted  now (again)
> Russell or not.]
> We are in a pretty liquid exchange-state (liquid OM).
> Otherwise the idea is excellent, with multiple choice.
> John
>  ----- Original Message -----
> From: Hal Ruhl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 8:49 PM
> Subject: Re: ASSA and Many-Worlds
> Hi John:
> Long ago there was some effort to write a FAQ for the list.  Perhaps we
> should give it another try.
> Hal Ruhl
> At 11:30 AM 2/6/2007, you wrote:
> Hal and list:
> I do not think anybody "fully understands" what other listers write, even
> if one thinks so.
> Or is it only my handicap?
> John M ----- Original Message ----- From: Hal Ruhl<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To:
> everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 10:24 PM 
> Subject:
> Re: ASSA and Many-Worlds
> Hi Bruno:
> I do not think I fully understand what you are saying.
> Suppose your model bans white rabbits from its evolving universes -
> meaning I take it that all successive states are fully logical
> consequences of their prior state.
> I would see this as a selection of one possibility from two.
> Lets us say that you are correct about this result re your model, this
> just seems to reinforce the idea that it is a sub set in order to avoid
> the information generating selection in the full set.
> Yours
> Hal Ruhl
> At 11:30 AM 2/5/2007, you wrote:
> >Le 05-févr.-07, à 00:46, Hal Ruhl a écrit : > > >  As far as I can tell
> from this, my model may include Bruno's model as > > a subset. > > >This
> means that even if "my theory" makes disappear all (1-person) >white
> rabbits, you will still have to justify that your overset does >not
> reintroduce new one. > >Bruno > > > 
> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/<http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/%7Emarchal/> >
> > >
> ------------------------------
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.29/673 - Release Date: 2/6/2007
> 5:52 PM
> >

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 

Reply via email to