Hi Richard Ruquist I worked with Chris for a number of years and we even met twice. I learned much from him and was sorry to hear that he died of lung cancer maybe 5 years ago.

## Advertising

Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/15/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." ----- Receiving the following content ----- From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-14, 13:13:01 Subject: Re: Qualitative calculations with binary numbers The late Chris Lofting turned I Ching into a science and even was able to derive Quantum Mechanics from it, at least what he considered to be QM. http://www.emotionaliching.com/myweb/newindex.html On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net> wrote: > On 9/14/2012 8:40 AM, Roger Clough wrote: >> >> Hi Bruno Marchal >> >> IMHO in Platonia (the Eternal) all logical statements must always >> be either true or false forever. However, in this everyday world, where >> time >> is a factor, such necessary logical statements become contingent, >> and may only sometimes be true. And possibly not everywhere. >> >> The I Ching provides a numerical way of combining, separating, >> and systematically manipulating qualitative situations, since >> these have visually been associated to trigrams of binary numbers. >> >> For example 111 or all yang lines is male and yang-ish. >> 000 is female and having softer heavier female qualitites. >> Then combining and reading down from left to right, 000000 is female >> 111111 is male. 111000 or male over female is stagnation >> while 000111 with female over male, is bliss. Which is what >> womens' lib teaches. >> >> There's so much more to such manipulations that it would take a book to >> show them all. > > Dear Roger, > > On this claim I agree with you 100%. > > >> >> >> Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net >> 9/14/2012 >> Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him >> so that everything could function." >> >> ----- Receiving the following content ----- >> From: Bruno Marchal >> Receiver: everything-list >> Time: 2012-09-14, 03:38:43 >> Subject: Re: Simple proof that our intelligence transcends that of >> computers >> >> >> On 30 Aug 2012, at 04:40, Terren Suydam wrote: >> >>> hmmm, my interpretation is that in platonia, all computations, all the >>> potential infinities of computations, have the same ontological >>> status. Meaning, there's nothing meaningful that can be said with >>> regard to any particular state of the UD - one can imagine that all >>> computations have been performed in a timeless way. >> >> OK. And not only they all exist, (in the same sense as all prime >> numbers exist), but they all exist with a particular weighted >> redundancy, independent of the choice of the U in the UD. >> >> >> >> >>> If so, it follows >>> that the state that corresponds to my mind at this moment has an >>> infinite number of instantiations in the UD (regardless of some >>> arbitrary "current" state of the UD). In fact this is the only way I >>> can make sense of the reversal, where physics emerges from "the >>> infinite computations going through my state". >> >> That's correct. >> >> >> >>> Otherwise, I think the >>> physics that emerges would depend in a contigent way on the >>> particulars of how the UD unfolds. >> >> Yes. >> >> >>> Whether the infinities involved with my current state are of the same >>> ordinality as the infinitie of all computations, I'm not sure. But I >>> think if it was a "lesser" infinity, so that the probability of my >>> state being instantiated did approach zero in the limit, then my >>> interpretation above would imply that the probability of my existence >>> is actually zero. Which is a contradiction. >> >> This does not necessarily follows. We can be relatively rare. To >> exists more than an instant, we need only to have enough normal >> computations going through or state, but the initial state can be >> "absolutely" rare. The same might be true for the origin of life. >> Logically, as I am agnostic on this, to be sure. >> >> Bruno >> >> >> >> >>> Terren >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 4:41 PM, meekerdb >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> But there are no infinities at any give state - only potential >>>> infinities. >>>> Of course that also implies that "you" are never complete, since at >>>> any >>>> given state in the UD there still remain infinitely many >>>> computations that >>>> will, in later steps, go through the states instantiating "you". >>>> >>>> Brent >>>> >>>> >>>> On 8/29/2012 9:04 AM, Terren Suydam wrote: >>>>> >>>>> It may not even be zero in the limit, since there's an infinity of >>>>> computations that generate my state. I suppose it comes down to the >>>>> ordinality of the infinities involved. >>>>> >>>>> Terren >>>>> >>>>>> Not zero, only zero in the limit of completing the infinite >>>>>> computations. >>>>>> So >>>>>> at any stage short the infinite completion the probability of >>>>>> "you" is >>>>>> very >>>>>> small, but non-zero. But we already knew that. >>>>>> >>>>>> Brent >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 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 >>>>>> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups >>>> "Everything List" group. >>>> To post to this group, send email to everything- >>>> l...@googlegroups.com. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. >>>> >>> -- >>> 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 >>> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >>> . >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en >>> . >>> >> 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 everything-list@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. >> > > > -- > Onward! > > Stephen > > http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/Outlaw.html > > > > -- > 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 > everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. > -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.