Hi Stephen,
I appreciate very much Louis Kauffman, including that paper. But I
don't see your point. Nothing there seems to cast any problem for comp
or its consequences.
Why not read the MGA threads directly, and address the points
specifically?
Bruno
Le 20-juil.-12, à 05:34, Stephen P. King a écrit :
Hi Bruno and Friends,
Perhaps this attached paper by Louis H. Kauffman will be a bit
enlightening as to what I have been trying to explain. He calls it
non-duality, I call it duality. The difference is just a matter of how
one thinks of it.
Onward!
Stephen
--
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.
<Laws of Form and the Logic of Non-Duality.pdf>
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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.
