> On 14 Jul 2019, at 15:01, PGC <multiplecit...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Sunday, July 14, 2019 at 11:00:30 AM UTC+2, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 13 Jul 2019, at 12:31, PGC <multipl...@gmail.com <javascript:>> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Saturday, July 13, 2019 at 10:41:00 AM UTC+2, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> I need a formula, and means to test it experimentally. Just to make some >> sense, and compare with the consequence of Mechanism. >> >> If you disagree with the proof of the incompatibility of Mechanism and >> (weak) Materialism, it would be nice to explain why. >> >> "Mechanism" is not refutable. > > Digital Mechanism is not refutable by introspection. But as it implies that > physics, and notably the logic of the observable obeys some logics (indeed > some quantum logic), it can be refuted (or judged less plausible) by > comparing the physical principles extracted from Mechanism with the > observation. Up to now, thanks to the “quantum weirdness” and its > “many-histories” interpretation, Mechanism fits with the observation. > > > Retrodiction plus the usual oversimplification. What a surprise. > > A historically nuanced view encompassing developments in all supposed fields > up to the present day, which conveniently don't include philosophical > (assemble Greek scholars for your interpretations and cite them, if you hold > yours truly to be wrong), metaphysical, literal, and aesthetic developments - > "mechanism fitting with observation" is an unclear aesthetic/personal > standard of evidence - and would never pass any university > department/academic panel worth its salt.
I don’t understand well what you say. I show that mechanism has empirical consequences, so that we can test it. Fitting with the observation made metaphysics into an experimental science. I don’t see what problem it could have for any university scientific department; Even in Brussels, they have not criticise this (in Brussels, the problem came from a philosopher who invoked its person metaphysical conviction, like the church did in his time. The work done shows mainly that the mind-body problem is NOT solved, but show a beginning of solution, and the testing possible. Nature, unfortunately, does not yet distinguish which of the three quantum logics which have been found is the one closer to the physicists one (who got also more than one), and this means that a lot of works remains. But the contrary would have been astonishing. > > Anybody with even an inclination of the complexity involved in the sweeping > generality of the claims purporting to explain the origin of physical laws, > reality, existence etc. - even a failed literature bachelor - would red flag > the ubiquitous truth assignments, the lack of verifiability, and ask for > extraordinary amounts - and measures of proof along with consequences of an > alleged metaphysics. Results. Not non-results, particularly as semantically, > the whole enterprise can be interpreted as anti-scientific, as well as a > confidence trick. > > Technically, it might have passed in isolated, less rigorous settings in the > past. But ethically, philosophically, linguistically, metaphysically, > physically? Today, in 2019? Sorry, but folks would laugh at the coarse > takeover attempt of the scientific enterprise with such an innocent, > personalized conception of evidence, science etc. They'd ask to be shown the > goods and your non-answer is clear. An infinite amount of posting/explanation > won't change it. Science is a "show me" kind of enterprise. You overrate > explanations and excuses. PGC Then may be show us. It is vague and negative, which makes me suspect .. what? The abandon of Platonism, or of Mechanism? If that is the case, is it Church thesis or “yes doctor”. I miss the message. It would be better to make specific comments, without a dismissive tone which is distracting and confusing. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > <mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/c25422c7-f0b9-4148-a750-6b6cc4f0e1f5%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/c25422c7-f0b9-4148-a750-6b6cc4f0e1f5%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/09DF4020-5814-464C-98DA-EF415C4F046F%40ulb.ac.be.
