On 27 May 2017 3:30 a.m., "Bruce Kellett" wrote:
On 27/05/2017 11:46 am, David Nyman wrote:
On 27 May 2017 at 01:44, Bruce Kellett <
bhkell...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>
> I think it is the interpretation of the data that is theory-dependent.
>
Not at all. Data don't just sit there staring yo
On 27 May 2017 at 01:07, Bruce Kellett wrote:
> On 26/05/2017 6:53 pm, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> On 26 May 2017, at 03:26, Bruce Kellett wrote:
>
> On 26/05/2017 9:11 am, David Nyman wrote:
>
> On 25 May 2017 23:18, "Brent Meeker" <
> meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
> I have told you my theory o
On 27 May 2017 at 01:07, Bruce Kellett wrote:
> On 26/05/2017 6:53 pm, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> On 26 May 2017, at 03:26, Bruce Kellett wrote:
>
> On 26/05/2017 9:11 am, David Nyman wrote:
>
> On 25 May 2017 23:18, "Brent Meeker" <
> meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
> I have told you my theory o
Due to the impenetrable tangle of quotes of quotes of quotes of quotes
of quotes
that is epidemic on
this list there is no way to tell who but
somebody wrote:
*"The point is to recognise that at a certain stage it is no longer
> scientific to ignore what is incapable of further explan
On 27 May 2017 at 16:02, John Clark wrote:
> Due to the impenetrable tangle of quotes of quotes of quotes of quotes
> of quotes
> that is epidemic on
>
> this list there is no way to tell who but
>
> somebody wrote:
>
> *"The point is to recognise that at a certain stage it is no lon
On Sat, May 27, 2017 David Nyman wrote:
> >
> it is unscientific to ignore alternative modes of explanation when
> progress seems to be blocked
>
Those
alternative modes of explanation
are not only
unscientific
there are a complete waste of time because there is no way, even with
u
On 27 May 2017 at 21:20, John Clark wrote:
> On Sat, May 27, 2017 David Nyman wrote:
>
>
>> >
>> it is unscientific to ignore alternative modes of explanation when
>> progress seems to be blocked
>>
>
> Those
> alternative modes of explanation
> are not only
> unscientific
> there a
-- Forwarded message --
From: David Nyman
Date: 27 May 2017 at 23:12
Subject: Re: Answers to David 4
To: meekerdb
Brent, why are y
ou still PM'ing me
?
Please let me know if you have read this.
On 27 May 2017 21:36, "Brent Meeker" wrote:
>
>
> On 5/27/2017 6:24 AM, David
-- Forwarded message --
From: David Nyman
Date: 27 May 2017 at 22:43
Subject: Re: Answers to David 4
To: meekerdb
On 27 May 2017 9:19 p.m., "Brent Meeker" wrote:
On 5/27/2017 5:36 AM, David Nyman wrote:
> It might. But ISTM that the entire project of explanation itself ent
On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 6:18 PM, David Nyman wrote:
> >
>> What is
>> actually
>> being claimed is that consciousness is the way data feels when it is
>> being processed
>> .
>>
>
> >
> Data feels something?
>
Yes.
>
> >
> Data feels something in a way?
>
Yes.
> >
> W
On 28 May 2017 12:36 a.m., "John Clark" wrote:
On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 6:18 PM, David Nyman wrote:
> >
>> What is
>> actually
>> being claimed is that consciousness is the way data feels when it is
>> being processed
>> .
>>
>
> >
> Data feels something?
>
Yes.
>
> >
> Data
On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 06:30:07PM -0700, Pierz wrote:
> Recently I've been studying a lot of history, and I've often thought about
> how, according to special relativity, you can translate time into space and
> vice versa, and therefore how from a different perspective we can think of
> the pas
On Sat, May 27, 2017 David Nyman wrote:
>
>> >
>>
>> Data feels something?
>>
>
>
> >
> Yes.
>
>
>
>>
>> >
>> >>
>>
>> Data feels something in a way?
>>
>
>
> >
> Yes.
>
>
> Ah, now I see what you mean. Proof by repetitive assertion.
>
I'm glad you see what I mean, but
On Saturday, May 27, 2017, Russell Standish wrote:
> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 06:30:07PM -0700, Pierz wrote:
> > Recently I've been studying a lot of history, and I've often thought
> about
> > how, according to special relativity, you can translate time into space
> and
> > vice versa, and theref
On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 09:24:31PM -0500, Jason Resch wrote:
>
> Regarding special relatively and collapse, I think the point is that two
> observers in different reference frames can have different presents. Two
> humans walking past each other on the sidewalk may have presents that
> include the
15 matches
Mail list logo