On 28 May 2014 14:12, <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 2:24:39 AM UTC+1, Liz R wrote: >> >> As far as I can see Bruno has a logical argument which happens to segue >> into a theory of physics. To disprove it, one merely needs to show that >> either his premises or his argument is wrong... >> > > I don't agree with you about that, but for point of order, I haven't gone > down that road anyway. He's wrong about falsification. I did try to drop > it. I shall probably try again. >
Bruno may well be wrong about falsification. I haven't tried to follow the arguments you and he have had on the subject, or not very much. I know Bruno has said he does have a theory of everything, which is subject to falsification... which it seems to me is an awful lot to derive from the idea that consciousness arises from computation ... but I guess some relatively simple idea can sometimes lead to a huge theory ... maybe when (or if) I get to grips with the MGA and the logic involved in deriving some features of physics from comp, I might have something more sensible to say on the matter, -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
