sorry about the typo. Dafa, not Dafta.
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 7:47 PM, John Carlson <yottz...@gmail.com> wrote: > And you let Falun Dafta think for you? Have you say anything positive > about anything else? > > > On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 6:27 PM, John Pratt <jpra...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> I see. So you let other people think for you. >> >> >> On Dec 29, 2012, at 4:23 PM, John Carlson wrote: >> >> John, check out Munchhausen's Trilemma >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnchhausen_trilemma as to why belief >> systems as are they are. Everyone has a belief system, including >> scientists, engineers,and mathematicians. Nothing is firm, including Falun >> Dafa. Enjoy the mystery of everything, including math, science and >> engineering. >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 6:05 PM, John Pratt <jpra...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> "Science cannot believe X because scientific theorem A1 says..." >>> >>> Here is what I know: the theorem of atoms was ascertained without >>> Godel. It was done in ancient Greece. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Dec 29, 2012, at 4:03 PM, John Carlson wrote: >>> >>> John, >>> >>> The FONC grant is done. Let it be. Please leave your email behavior at >>> the door. As to why science cannot believe in such things is because of >>> Godel's Incompleteness Theorems. Science doesn't have an axiom for it like >>> it does for a point (in math). >>> >>> Find the most succinct axiom you can find, and bring it to us. Here are >>> two that could be improved: >>> >>> Something doesn't come from nothing. >>> Complexity doesn't increase. >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 5:33 PM, John Pratt <jpra...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> These are larger issues, rarely brought up anywhere except in >>>> places where people don't counter the mainstream. How is it >>>> that FONC needs to exist? Because people don't consider things >>>> like this. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Dec 29, 2012, at 3:27 PM, David Leibs wrote: >>>> >>>> Are you sure you don't want a response from me? Are you trying to put >>>> Alan in a petri dish? >>>> -David Leibs >>>> >>>> On Dec 29, 2012, at 3:23 PM, John Pratt <jpra...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> I want a response from Alan Kay on this thread. Then I will leave you >>>> all alone. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Dec 29, 2012, at 3:16 PM, David Harris wrote: >>>> >>>> What are you on about? How is this related to FONC? >>>> >>>> David >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 3:10 PM, John Pratt <jpra...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> What sickness science brings to everyday people! They cannot even >>>>> believe in mysterious things, such as the divine, without first thinking >>>>> it >>>>> has to show up on a laboratory microscope. >>>>> >>>>> The petri dish has to exist before the thing will be acknowledged as >>>>> fitting inside a petri dish. >>>>> >>>>> "We don't have a petri dish for that. It cannot exist. I cannot >>>>> study it inside of its petri dish." >>>>> >>>>> "Tell me where its petri dish is first, then I will believe you and we >>>>> will go study it." >>>>> >>>>> Mystical things of the past are regarded as superstition, described in >>>>> terms of theoretical, mechanical concepts. Automobiles, air planes, and >>>>> light rail trains are the indicators of supreme accomplishments given to >>>>> man by this modern science. >>>>> >>>>> Computers, electronics are never questioned for what they are >>>>> underneath-- a huge mess of chemical circuits. Contemptible expediency in >>>>> its approach to making its own version of warped plastic and silicon >>>>> clockwork. >>>>> >>>>> Cram as much as you invent into the smallest space possible, sheath it >>>>> with cosmetic jewelry cases, and sell it to the world, telling the world >>>>> it >>>>> is pure jewelry, inside and out. When it happens to hit the floor, the >>>>> lie >>>>> is exposed-- a mess of soldering, wires, and toxic chemicals. >>>>> >>>>> Dazzling athletics, to cram this inelegant approach to match the >>>>> world's demand for novelty and excitement. >>>>> >>>>> Pack it all into a tiny package. Call it sheer wizardry and a triumph >>>>> of modern science. Its engineers confounded by accusations of philistine >>>>> circuitry-- "engineering, math, and science works! our engineering campus >>>>> buildings are not ugly-- they are utilitarian! I like math and was good >>>>> at >>>>> it in high school." >>>>> >>>>> If the shoe fits, wear it regardless of whether the shoe is >>>>> distasteful in appearance on the outside. Make a distasteful shoe, cover >>>>> it up with a cosmetic shell. Where there is a problem, an engineer will >>>>> solve it. Make sure that you don't need a solution you want to know >>>>> about, >>>>> however. Just be content that a problem was solved and look the other way >>>>> when the details are explained of its operation. >>>>> >>>>> "That'll do the trick." >>>>> >>>>> I didn't like parabolas because the world cannot be reduced to two, >>>>> three, or four axes, thank you very much. >>>>> >>>>> I don't like polynomials because I want to draw the line before I call >>>>> it a function of the world, saying that the world consists only of >>>>> deterministic, reductionist functions. "Oh, then you are just tired of >>>>> 'discreteness' and you need its polar opposite of discreteness, >>>>> non-discreteness." >>>>> >>>>> Such is mathematics and science today. "Why does no one want to learn >>>>> math and science anymore??" >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> fonc mailing list >>>>> fonc@vpri.org >>>>> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> fonc mailing list >>>> fonc@vpri.org >>>> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> fonc mailing list >>>> fonc@vpri.org >>>> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> fonc mailing list >>>> fonc@vpri.org >>>> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> fonc mailing list >>>> fonc@vpri.org >>>> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> fonc mailing list >>> fonc@vpri.org >>> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> fonc mailing list >>> fonc@vpri.org >>> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> fonc mailing list >> fonc@vpri.org >> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> fonc mailing list >> fonc@vpri.org >> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc >> >> >
_______________________________________________ fonc mailing list fonc@vpri.org http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
