On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 7:19 PM, Russell Standish <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >> Bruno's argument shows that they must be a part of the phenomenal > (experienced) world if COMP is true. > > > >> OK then "comp" is false. And now that we know that "comp" is false > what's the point of talking about it anymore? > > > So you know for certainty that the arrival times of electrons in a > Geiger counter from a beta decay source is computable. How? > Although I don't know it for certain I strongly suspect that beta decay is not computable, I think it's random; but I think it could provide at best a few dozen digits not a infinite number of digits that the Real Numbers require. But never mind, if you want it to be true then "comp" is true, or if you prefer it to be false then "comp" is false. I won't fight you over it because I don't give a damn about "comp" one way or the other. John K Clark -- 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.
