On 7/7/2012 1:40 PM, John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 Evgenii Rudnyi <use...@rudnyi.ru <mailto:use...@rudnyi.ru>> wrote:

    > 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 begin.

        “/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
    M-theory but

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 ignoramuses.

    > In the book, there are many statements against religion.

Thank God!

    > comments in Grand Design by Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow,

    “Traditionally these are questions for philosophy, but philosophy
is dead.

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 the slack.

  John K Clark


My response to this thread is to reference this interview: http://simplycharly.com/wittgenstein/jaakko_hintikka_interview.php ;-)



"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 everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to