Oh, I don't know if Schrodinger would sic his cat on me, or Wigner would sic his friend on me for such insolence? It may even be worthy of being a prayer as it describes reality? As a physicist you should not be shocked (yes of course appalled) that the peasants of the fields find some of your works intellectually and emotionally usable. We glean the fields (electrodynamic or chromodynamic) for things to feed the mind and well as the belly. You should see, what we have done with Andrew Strominger and company's Lectures on the Infrared Structure of Gravity and Gauge Theory. Wait! Better not, because we all have our strengths and weaknesses.
-----Original Message----- From: Lawrence Crowell <[email protected]> To: Everything List <[email protected]> Sent: Sun, Jul 4, 2021 12:18 pm Subject: Re: Was, Re: The theology of number, (Now) The Universe Learns (not released on April 1st) On Sunday, July 4, 2021 at 12:56:38 AM UTC-5 [email protected] wrote: Our descendents will have to see how far they can push things, Bruno. That is, if they can push things, and if we can as a species encourage the machinery to benefit us? Machines could do this making enjoyable discoveries, and enjoyable innovations. We do this to make people have better lives just as meta-goal because it feels better, at least for me, but then, I am just a bourgeoise. For my attitude, theology is a mental app for people to use. Some people, especially, some women, seem to glean ideas about the big Platonic network in the sky, and it seems to work, or, perhaps, I am just easily tricked? Theologies are always welcome if they benefit people? Perhaps for some or many, the Schrodinger Equation can be a good substitute for a matra of The Lord's Prayer? I don't know how I'd pronounce it as a prayer, though? Calling it a prayer is a bit of an insult. LC -----Original Message----- From: Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sat, Jul 3, 2021 7:43 am Subject: Re: Was, Re: The theology of number, (Now) The Universe Learns (not released on April 1st) On 14 Jun 2021, at 17:05, spudboy100 via Everything List <[email protected]> wrote: A wise idea to clear up the word clutter. New religions I hold we do not need. It's better to use science to upgrade them. That the whole point. To bring back reason in theology, which is the fundamental science by definition, before we commit any ontological commitment, be it is a universe or in arithmetic, or whatever. That is what theology has been from Pythagorus and Parmenides ()500) to Damascius (+500). Then we can see that the ideally sound universal+ (Löbian) machine have a rich mathematical theology, which is testable as it contains physics, and indeed QM-without-collapse confirms it strikingly well up to now, qualitatively and quantitatively. If the universe does indeed learn as proposed by the physicist, then that's a good thing. That is impossible once we bet that learning is a mechanical procedure, like with Darwin. In that case the physical universe Is a statistical pattern emerging from the (sigma_1) number relations. Skeptic Michael Shermer paraphrasing Arthur C. Clarke, said: A sufficiently advanced alien intelligence is indistinguishable from God.” No machine can, indeed, distinguish an oracle/god (in Turing sense) from a machine more complex than themselves. But science is in prediction, using the simplest conceptual assumptions, not in any metaphysical certainties, despite some can exist (but have to remain private). Bruno -----Original Message----- From: John Clark <[email protected]> To: 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Mon, Jun 14, 2021 10:21 am Subject: Re: Was, Re: The theology of number, (Now) The Universe Learns (not released on April 1st) On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 12:18 PM spudboy100 via Everything List <[email protected]> wrote: > I am not saying we do not need theology, Maybe you're not saying we don't need theology, but I certainly am. By the way, the post I'm responding to contained 14 iterations of quotes, that's quotes of quotes of quotes of quotes of quotes of quotes of quotes of quotes of quotes of quotes of quotes of quotes of quotes of quotes, and that makes it a bit difficult to figure out who is saying what to who so I have removed them. John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis yab -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv2u728c2V%3Dys689k%3Di6UkYZYLJcaSRfR4OkkOw3mnKD0g%40mail.gmail.com. -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/312723948.4982996.1623683125051%40mail.yahoo.com. -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/9D88EFD7-4762-4E30-8647-012CD7F984A2%40ulb.ac.be. -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/d9999d08-c2de-4e9f-b0dc-6afb102448e9n%40googlegroups.com. -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/1728860285.2673630.1625444478394%40mail.yahoo.com.
