# Re: Re: Qualitative calculations with binary numbers

```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. ```
```

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
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
>> 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
>>>>>> "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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups
>>>> "Everything List" group.
>>>> To post to this group, send email to everything-
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>>
>>> --
>>> 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
>>> .
>>>
>> 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
>> For more options, visit this group at
>>
>
>
> --
> 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
> For more options, visit this group at
>

--
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