On 19 Jan 2014, at 21:09, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Dear Bruno,
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be>
wrote:
On 18 Jan 2014, at 22:52, Stephen Paul King wrote:
I will write it again. Block Universes are an incoherent idea. It
only seems to work because we imagine tem as existing out there and
subject to our inspection from the outside. As if we are God or
something... This very idea is the problem, there is no God's eye
view that can map faithfully to any 1p view we might have.
In which theory?
It is an assumption that is smuggled into science and math. An
unjustified extension of the 1p to cover all of the universe.
Laplace's Demon is a good example of this.
That does not give a theory.
You are just communicating a personal conviction or feeling.
Sure, but I think you can see for yourself what its error is. It is
most difficult to question assumptions that we believe to be true
and have no simple physical falsification.
The problem is not the assumption, as you seem to defend comp (unlike
me). the point is the validity of a reasoning. By definition of
validity, that does not depend of the truth or falsity of the
assumptions.
I am OK with that, but not if you oppose it to pretend that there is
a flaw in a piece of science.
It is a flaw in the assumed ontological base of science, the idea
that 1) observation is not interaction,
This is not assumed anywhere in the proof.
2) that it can occur passively and with no thermodynamic cost -
exploration of Maxwell's demon proved otherwise-,
?
3) can be arbitrarily extended.
?
3) is easily disproven using arguments from topology. Can a single
sheet cover a 3-manifold? No!
?
You must use your personal conviction to isolate the flaw. Not just
repeat that there is one.
I have told you what the flaw is that I see.
Not at all. Sorry. No pint at all made in the UDA is addressed. Your
points here are fuzzy, and seems to criticize comp, which is not the
matter of the debate.
You have no explanation for multiple minds in interaction.
That is contingent. It would be a refutation if it was "you cannot
have an explanation for ...", but this is something that you should
prove then.
And then we do get a first person plural, and all what needs to be
done, is to see if the material hypostases get the physical laws as we
know them. And that has become pure math, in this comp frame.
Anyway, the fact that some theory does not explain something is NOT a
proof that a reasoning done in that theory is invalid.
Bruno
Descartes himself neglected to consider how minds would interact. If
he had, he would have corrected his nonsense.
Bruno
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in
the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/everything-list/TBc_y2MZV5c/unsubscribe
.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
Kindest Regards,
Stephen Paul King
Senior Researcher
Mobile: (864) 567-3099
stephe...@provensecure.com
http://www.provensecure.us/
“This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the
use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may
contain information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged,
confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may
be constituted as attorney work product. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination,
distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this message in error, notify
sender immediately and delete this message immediately.”
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
