On 7/20/2012 12:00 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 7:58 PM, Stephen P. King
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 7/19/2012 7:09 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Stephen P. King
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
To fix a typo
On 7/19/2012 3:46 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
Dear Bruno,
I need to slow down and just address this question of
your as it seems to be the point where we disconnect from
understanding each other.
On 7/19/2012 10:22 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
At this stage I will ask you to define "physical".
The physical is the represented as the sum of
incontrovertible
<http://www.thefreedictionary.com/incontrovertible> facts
that mutually communicating observers have in common.
Some might say the only incontrovertible fact is "I think therefore I
am" but this can't be communicated.
Hi Jason,
I missed this sentence somehow. The 1p experience cannot be itself
communicated but the representation of it (which is 3p) that "I think
therefore I am" can. We are doing it right here, no? This leads to an
idea of what is 3p; that which is bisimilar for many observers.
--
Onward!
Stephen
"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 protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
