On 1/2/2018 6:36 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Jan 2018, at 23:38, Brent Meeker wrote:
No. I do not commit the fallacy of "Your god is false, so my god is
real". I'm willing to say I don't know what must be real.
You just did it. You just said in your previews post: " I think
arithmetic is a human invention...not the basis of reality."
A logician should know the difference between saying what something is
not and saying what something is.
...
Bell is (rightly) famous for suggesting an definitive
experiment...not just an illustration.
Here too. In particular the violation of Bell's inequality itself can
be tested in the machine's physics. That is detailed in my long thesis
version.
Is it available online?
Brent
It leads to complex math, but that is hardly an argument of falsity.
If the results were not ignored, (for pseudo-philosophical reason
intolerable in science), we would have already refuted
computationalism (or that classical indexical weak formulation of it),
or improved it, notably by noting which of S4Grz1, Z1* and X1* are
closer to the physicists' quantum logic. Note that if physics is
entirely explained in S4Grz1, that would be a case for some sort of
solipsism, but not ecaxtly the common one, and also, there are few
chance that can happen (because quantum logic obeys the excluded
middle, and the quantum logic coming from S4Grz1 does not).
Bruno
--
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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
