On 7/7/2012 1:40 PM, John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 Evgenii Rudnyi <use...@rudnyi.ru
> Hawking and Mlodinow start with the statement that free will is
If they said that, and I don't recall that they did, they were being
much too kind in equating the "free will" noise to something as
concrete as illusion.
> An interesting question is however, where resulting visual
mental concepts are located.
I find it about as interesting as asking where "big" or the number
eleven is located and shows the same profound misunderstanding of the
situation on so many different levels that it's hard to know where to
“/Today we know that helium and lithium, atoms whose nuclei
contain two and three protons, were also primordially
synthesized, in much smaller amounts, when the universe was
about 200 seconds old/.”
> However, is this knowledge or a belief? Assume that there
was Big Bang described by the M-theory as supposed by the book.
The Big Bang does not need anything as exotic as M-theory to make that
prediction, from just humdrum nuclear physics, the same ideas that
made the H-bomb, we can calculate that if the universe started from
100% hydrogen, the simplest element, that was at several hundred
billion degrees Centigrade then in about 200 seconds as a result of
fusion reactions you'd have 74.9% Hydrogen 24.9% Helium and .01%
deuterium and 10^-10 % Lithium, and you can calculate that in the in
13.7 bullion years since then these percentages should have changed
very little, and when know that these are exactly the observed values
we see today. This is far too good a agreement for it to be coincidence.
> It well might be that philosophers are less informed about the
Forget M-theory, most professional philosophers are totally ignorant
about ANY of the huge philosophical developments that have happened in
the last 150 years; they know nothing about Quantum Mechanics or
Relativity or the profound works of Godel or Turing, they know that
DNA has something to do with heredity but could not tell you exactly
what or how it works, they don't even know it's digital; they've
heard of Darwin but have only the haziest understanding of what he
said and have even less interest in it; maybe they know the Universe
is expanding but the knowledge that it's accelerating hasn't trickled
down to them yet because that was only discovered 15 years ago and
they're slow learners; they don't even know that light is a wave of
electric and magnetic fields or understand simple classical mechanics
and prefer to talk about the worst physicist who ever lived,
Aristotle. In short most modern philosophers are philosophical
> In the book, there are many statements against religion.
> comments in Grand Design by Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow,
“Traditionally these are questions for philosophy, but philosophy
Philosophy isn't dead but professional philosophers are as good as,
they haven't made a contribution to our understanding of how the world
works in centuries, scientists and mathematicians have had to pick up
John K Clark
My response to this thread is to reference this interview:
"Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed."
~ Francis Bacon
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
For more options, visit this group at