On Tuesday, October 9, 2018 at 6:47:03 PM UTC, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, October 9, 2018 at 12:36:02 PM UTC-5, agrays...@gmail.com > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Monday, October 8, 2018 at 6:07:00 AM UTC, Philip Thrift wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sunday, October 7, 2018 at 7:28:33 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 10/7/2018 11:50 AM, Philip Thrift wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> What isn't clear yet to me is how experience (that which one >>>> experiences in a phenomenal sense) comes out of pure information. (They >>>> can >>>> be simulated, but not realized.) If experientiality itself a property of >>>> the "hardware" (matter) and physics is just "software", then it makes more >>>> sense. >>>> >>>> That seems impossibly vague. Why is this property of experientiality >>>> associated with the physical processes of perception and not other >>>> physical >>>> processes? Why is a associated with processes at all? If it's a property >>>> of matter then it's like weight. It doesn't need a process to be realized? >>>> >>>> Brent >>>> >>> >>> Who knows yet how experiential modalities appear in matter? Is it at the >>> particle level or at higher levels, like molecules or cells? Then issues >>> like downward causation arise. >>> >>> Properties of particles [ from >>> http://www1.udel.edu/mvb/PS146htm/146nopp.html ]: >>> >>> Measurable properties of particles >>> >>> 1. Mass >>> 2. Charge >>> 3. Spin >>> 4. Decays >>> 1. Products >>> 2. Lifetime >>> 5. Scattering >>> 1. Cross-section >>> 2. Resonance >>> 3. Resonance width and lifetime >>> >>> Experiential modalities could be like 4 or 5. >>> >>> Quarks have additional properties: [ >>> https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Properties_of_quarks ]. >>> >>> "While the process of flavor transformation is the same for all quarks, >>> each quark has a preference to transform into the quark of its own >>> generation." >>> >>> It is true that processes are connected to material properties, but it >>> seems to make sense to see matter as being composed of both properties and >>> processes together. >>> >>> - pt >>> >> >> *You are seeking what Kant called "the thing in itself". Can you form a >> model of something, aka substance or matter, that under different >> circumstances manifests the apparently unrelated properties we measure? AG * >> > > What Kant called "noumena" [ > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noumenon#Kant's_usage ] is just "matter" (I > say): > > - https://codicalist.wordpress.com/2018/08/02/the-noumenality-of-matter/ > df > - pt >
*I don't think we're close to having a model for it; say, that which always manifests energy but only sometimes manifests charge. AG * -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
