Re: Selecting your future branch
On 26 Jun 2014, at 22:27, John Clark wrote: On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: We use the usual sense of self defined by the yes doctor. Nobody does that, even you don't do that to define yourself except when you're arguing philosophy on the internet. ? ! We use that all the time. I do it just now to reply to you. As I said, even you don't do that to define yourself, except when you're arguing philosophy on the internet. There is no choice, if probability is to be derived its got to be iterated, and no matter how often you iterate it Mr. You ALWAYS sees Moscow only AND Mr. You ALWAYS sees Washington only; This contradicts 2^n - 1 diaries It most certainly does NOT, because MR. YOU HAS BEEN DUPLICATED! The W-john Clark will be force to change its mind, Only if John Clark is a dimwit, I don't think he is but opinions vary. unless he confuse him [...] Quotation marks don't help, who the hell is Mr. Him ? him as the owner of this or that particular diary. Then Mr. Him is not the same as Mr. You, the original question was about Mr. You so why even talk to Mr. Him. Both the W-person and the M-person are the H-person, Yes, but the W-person is not the M-person. Exactly, so the H-guy cannot be sure about its future 1-view *from the unique 1-view that he will live with certainty (certain bears on unique here). In the 2 slit experiment it's always crystal clear who Mr. You is, I don't see that. In Everett, if I put you in the state M+W [...] That's a cool superpower you have there, but how do I know it's real? You claim to have done something spectacular but I still only see one person around here that looks like me, that's why in everyday life personal pronouns cause no problems and never will until duplicating machines are actually invented. you can't Who can't? The H-guy. predict with certainlty the unique city you will see The city who will see? The H-guy. Above you did agree that both copies are the H-guy. The 2 slit experiment is about what a observer will see, Bruno's thought experiment is about the sense of self of the observer. Wrong. It is about what an observer will see. You push a button, and open a door, and note which unique city you see Wrong. What the observer sees changes the sense of self, seeing Moscow is the one and only thing that changed the Helsinki man into the Moscow man and is the only thing that differentiates him from the Washington man, he saw a different city. Not that predictions are of the slightest importance in this matter but if we're talking about the Helsinki Man (aka the man currently seeing Helsinki) and the Helsinki Man is destroyed after the duplication then the correct prediction about what the Helsinki Man will see would obviously be absolutely nothing. that would contradict step one, and step 0, which you have accepted. Fortunately I've long ago forgotten what step 0 Unfortunately you forget also the question asked, which is about what you will live in the 1p sense, from the 1p view, and not any 3p view on where those unique 1-view appears. is but if Mr. Helsinki is the guy currently seeing Helsinki and you destroy the guy currently seeing Helsinki then obviously Mr. Helsinki is now seeing absolutely nothing, although Mr. You is doing just fine and is seeing Washington AND Moscow. Not simultaneously. You are stuck in your deny of the question asked. If on the other hand we're talking about what Mr. You will see (and yes from Mr. You's first person perspective) then the correct prediction would be Moscow AND Washington and perhaps Helsinki. Not from the 1-view. The? Who's 1-view? Of the H-guys (with a s as he is in both W and M). Both see only one city. I do provides the nuances needed (notably the 1/3 distinction) to avoid any ambiguity. Then why is Bruno Marchal so addicted to personal pronouns, why is Bruno Marchal incapable of expressing a single idea without the liberal use of them? Why not? There is no problem when you distinguish the 1-view from the 3-view (a distinction which is athe key at the base of the mind-body problem). And as I explained Bruno Marchal must already believe that both Mr. M and Mr. W are both Mr. You, otherwise there would be no point in interviewing them. Yes. this has been clear all long, and makes my point. That is why we have to interview them both. That makes no sense. If you want to answer the question are there any red marbles in this black bag? and you reach into the bad and pull out a red marble then it is not necessary to reach in again to answer the question. If the Moscow Man is Mr. You then the probability Mr. You will see Moscow is 1.0, Refuted at once by the W guy, given that the question is on the 1- view, from the 1-view. You keep talking on the 1-view seen by a putative mind
Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture
On 29 June 2014 05:47, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: t's the materialist hat (I'm not sure which colour it is). Calling bullshit! on comp and similar ideas without stopping to understand them seems to stem from a religious belief in materialism (Bill Taylor on the FOAR forum is another example of this). There is endless spluttering and shouting and often even (gasp) capital letters, but never any sign that the person concerned has stopped and thought it through, in the spirit of what if he's got a point? Yeah, occasionally I find myself re-reading conversations I had with Bruno years ago (usually as a result of googling for some reference). It reminds me that in the beginning I was pretty certain he must be wrong, but his patience and persistence forced me repeatedly to refine and reconsider my arguments, to the point that eventually I started to see the holes in my own logic. This is the value of really sticking to a line of thought in discussion (as opposed to point scoring). It helps us, if we are willing to make the effort, to expose the contradictory assumptions in our own thinking. David -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Is Consciousness Computable?
On 26 Jun 2014, at 03:55, LizR wrote: On 26 June 2014 03:49, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 29 May 2014, at 00:17, LizR wrote: On 28 May 2014 19:46, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 5/28/2014 12:35 AM, LizR wrote: On 28 May 2014 16:20, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: I think the more crucial step is arguing that computation (and therefore consciousness) can exist without physics. That physical instantiation is dispensable. Yes indeed. I would say that for comp to be meaningful, it's necessary to show that information is a real (and fundamental) thing, rather than something that only has relevance / meaning to us - I suppose deriving the entropy of a black hole, the Beckenstein bound and the holographic principle all hint that this is the case. (Maybe QM unitarity and the black hole information paradox too?) I'm not sure how secure a footing any of these items put the reification of information it on, though. As Bruno has noted, we live on border between order and chaos - neither maximum nor minimum information/entropy but something like complexity. Here's recent survey of ways to quantify it by Scott Aaronso, Sean Carroll and Lauren Ouellette. http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=1818 As usual I don't have time to read that paper, at least not immediately. However I see that defining complexity appear to require coarse graining. If so, I would take this to mean that there isn't anything fundamental being defined - or at least that we're in a grey area where nothing is known to be fundamental. On the other hand, entropy used to require coarse graining but as I mentioned above has now been defined for black holes, so assuming BHs really exist (and the things we think are BHs aren't some other type of massive object of an undefined nature) that would at least suggest that fundamental physics involves entropy, and hence information. Is there any complexity measure that doesn;t involve CG and hence isn't just (imho) in the eye of the beholder ? Computer science provides a lot of definition for complexity, below the computable, like SPACE or TIME needed, related to tractability issues and above the computable, like the degree of unsolvability shown to exists by using machine + oracles (for example). Those notion are typically not in the eye of the beholder, as they are the same for all universal numbers. Computer scientist says that they are machine-independent notion. They remain invariant for the change of the base of the phi_i. With comp, what i showed is that we have indeed to extract the law of the qubits (quantum logic) from the laws of the bits (the laws of Boole, + Boolos). IMO, Everett + decoherence already shows the road qubits to bits. But comp provides a double (by G/G*) reverse of that road, which separates quanta and qualia (normally, although quanta must be a first person plural). It sounds to me as though you are saying that information is real if arithmetic is real...? What do you mean by real here? The question is not so much about what is real, but about what is primitively real. With computationalism, and the TOE chosen, 0, s(0), ... and + and * are primitively real, as we assume the RA axioms. Information is derived from it, both the classical one, and the quantum one. But a physicist like Landauer(*) would say that information is real because it is an essentially physical things: (*) http://www.uni-leipzig.de/~biophy09/Biophysik-Vorlesung_2009-2010_DATA/QUELLEN/LIT/A/B/3/Landauer_1996_physical_nature_information.pdf (If so, deriving the entropy of a black hole would be support for comp :-) I don't see why. It would be consistent with Landauer's notion of physical information, ISTM. 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. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Selecting your future branch
On 26 Jun 2014, at 03:58, LizR wrote: On 26 June 2014 03:06, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: And that one guy is Mr. You. Yes, it's perfectly true that other guys have seen different sequences and those other guys are not each other, but they are all Mr. You because they all remember being the Helsinki Man even if different things have happened to them after the duplication. But so what? As I keep saying this is a very odd situation because we're not accustomed with dealing with duplicating machines, but it is NOT a logical paradox because Mr. You HAS BEEN DUPLICATED. Is someone claiming this is a logical paradox? Indeed. No one did. Assuming duplicators are possible (or the MWI is correct) it seems fairly unparadoxical to me. Indeed. 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. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Disproving physicalism from COMP
On 26 Jun 2014, at 05:44, LizR wrote: On 26 June 2014 15:32, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 6/25/2014 7:03 PM, LizR wrote: On 25 June 2014 16:52, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 6/24/2014 2:29 AM, LizR wrote: On 24 June 2014 17:04, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: If primitive matter existed, and if it has a role for consciousness, or for consciousness instantiation, step 8, and the argument above, makes that role very mysterious, so much that it is not clear why we could still say yes to the doctor in virtue of correct digital rendering. You can still say yes to the doctor because he is going to use matter to make your brain prosthesis. Surely that will just be a copy that thinks it's you - it won't be you, so if you are destroyed in the process of making the digital copy, you really do die. While in comp the digital copy is you, by definition. ?? Comp is the theory that it will be you after the doctor gives you a prothesis for your brain (plus some other assumptions). It will be you even after you are duplicated (though it's troubling for JKC that you is both singular and plural). Yes, that's right. And primitive materialism would distinguish between two identical versions of you, if only because they occupy different positions (and due to no-cloning). So a PM copy could only ever be a copy that thinks it's you, while a comp copy would be one that actually is you (assuming comp is correct, of course). The Everett copy is different because it cannot interact with it's original, so they can have the same past including spacetime location. In Bruno's thought experiment the M copy and the W copy are physically different. If comp is true then at the most fundamental level it's impossible to have copies; it would be likehaving copies of the number 7. Insofar as I understand comp, it's not only possible to have copies, but there are an infinite number of them responsible for every moment of conscious experience. These are relative computations or something similar. I expect Bruno will explain better when he appears. You are right, because you are not your description. You are the abstract (immaterial) person associated with that description, and associated with any equivalent (at some level) description handled by the relevant relative universal numbers in arithmetic. Only the first person view is not first person duplicable (although 3-1 duplicable, which is what John Clark exploit to refute step 3, by confusing the 3-1 view with each 1-view). OK? 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. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture
On 29 Jun 2014, at 04:26, Kim Jones wrote: On 29 Jun 2014, at 4:13 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: As long as quasi-rationalists like you mock the theological field, and prevent any seriousness there, it will remain in the province of the bullshit vendors. The trouble with thinkers like Clark is that they are really liars to themselves. Clark is a classic example of someone who has great knowledge of a field but remains a lousy thinker due to his dishonesty and his selective perception. Because it is actually kind of impossible to lie to oneself, the only way to work the magic trick is to utter the lie in public (under the guise of rational thinking) in the hope that clever use of selective perception and bullying tactics, vulgar language, colourful metsphors and analogies etc. will rally a bunch of sheeple behind him as some form of support. In other words, he believes that the more he persists by denying what he has understood all too well but would prefer wasn't within the scope of the possible (because it doesn't suit his personal taste) - the more vulgar his use of language, the more bully-boy his style, the more tortured and affected the use of analogy (often borrowed from Dawkins who often borrows from Bertrand Russell) the more he feels he has won some kind of intellectual point-scoring match. Clark is the kind of individual that believes progress is always a kind of battle against an opponent or an opposition. He is great at physics and related fields and in those posts we stand back in awe of his command of detail. Knowledge of a particular field or fields, however - I will never tire of saying - does not make you the Supreme Commander Of All Thinking. Such individuals have a well- known behavioural pattern: an intense emotional need to be seen to be right about everything but probably have never had an original idea in their life because they never risk anything; they only ever go to the safe havens. The fact that Clark keeps showing up in discussions where he is clearly out of his depth merely reinforces this impression. These guys over here are talking about something I understand but hate because it's not something that an instrumentalist Aristotelian physicalist mainstream scientific thinker like me should have to put with. I never miss reading posts by John K Clark. He is the perfect model of everything that is ineffectual with the thinking system that humans use. But he does know an awful lot about physics, to be fair. You might be right. It is difficult to evaluate the degree of self- lie awareness. My feeling is that Clark has ego-issue. It might be the usual jealousy or something of that kind. Once he made a post where he explained that he was open to arithmeticalism, so he might not be that much Aristotelian. I think it is more related with ego- psychological issue than with the matter subject. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?
On 26 Jun 2014, at 05:51, LizR wrote: On 26 June 2014 15:44, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 6/25/2014 8:38 PM, LizR wrote: On 26 June 2014 15:25, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 6/25/2014 6:47 PM, LizR wrote: On 26 June 2014 09:08, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 6/25/2014 11:48 AM, Jason Resch wrote: Now I know Bruno will say this is just choosing the wrong level, but the point is that it's not just the level which is sufficient for interaction with neurons, but also the level which captures interaction with 'external' or 'environmental' variables, especially perceptions. Then we must contemplate not just replacing some brain components, but simulating some of the external world. So it seems to me there is a tradeoff. This is why Bruno often says you can assume the whole milky-way galaxy. Which makes no theoretical difference once you assume the laws of physics are computable. If you emulate a large enough volume, then it takes some FTL effect beyond the past light cone of the emulated volume to mess things up. Exactly. But that's why I don't find step 8 convincing. If you have to simulate so much that you've essentially created a simulated world, then all you've shown is that a simulated consciousness can exist in a simulated world and this is indpendent of the physical substrate. Not quite. If you assume no zombies, then you've shown that an actual consciousness can exist in a simulated world. Sure, that's already implicit in assuming consciousness is produced by certain computational processes. Yes, so there was no need to say simulated above. It looked as though you were trying to make a distinction when there isn't one. There's not a distinction that makes one consciousness different from the other, except that one is conscious of the simulated world and one is conscious of this world. And if the simulation is good enough they have identical experiences, so - no different at all. In fact it's hard to believe that consciousness is something that can be simulated, regardless of how its achieved I imagine it's always actual, by definition, whether it's experiencing a simulated world or a real one (which is also a simulation, at least in our case, as I believe Kant pointed out). I take Bruno (and Maudlin) to be arguing that there need not be any physical process to instantiate consciousness - and that is what I find unconvincing. To be sure, both Maudlin and the MGA shows that comp and mechanism are incompatible, but maudlin takes this as a difficulty for the computationalist, and I take it as a difficulty for the (weak) materialist (just because I work in comp). Note that it is an arithmetical fact that arithmetic emulates all simulations. Saying that some of those are more real than other is a metaphysical assumption, and MGA shows that it is a gap-of-the-god type of assumption. I realise that you find it unconvincing, of course, and I am still hopeful that you will come up with a convincing reason why, i.e. one that doesn't just say I just don't see how X can be true. (Or that Bruno will come up with a convincing reason why not. (Or maybe I'll just remain agnostic indefinitely, which is probably best...)) if comp is true, *and* if one universal number execution U needs to be reifed with some primary matter (like with common physicalism), then it is up to you to explain the role of the special U in consciousness, and this without extracting that winning U from the measure problem. This means that you will need to invent a specifically *non testable* notion of primitive matter exactly at the place where comp proves that if it exist we can test it. It is weird that when someone use creationist god-of-the-gap in an argument, most people see the logical or epistemological deficiency, but yet when people use the primitive-matter-of-the-gap, they don't see it. Well, we see that people can't already change their mind after 70 years of brainwashing (like in the cannabis file), so it is not so astonishing that they find hard to abandon the primary matter of Aristotle, which is 1500 years of brainwashing. Matter is visible, but primitive (assumed) matter is not. It is not a question of truth, but of valid or not argument in the applied fields. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: American Intelligence
Oh… I realize who I am arguing with – a couch potato general who has never tasted war, wishing war (for others to wage in distant lands). One question Rambo, you had your chance, why didn’t you go yourself? Chrissy, your tautings tend to resemble the last resort of the progressive. to which I shrug in response. I visited the WTC ruins in Nov 2001, and my nephew and his wife worked and lived in Manhattan back then, and saw the attacks close up, that day,and -so did lots of people, Being self righteous, is also typical of the proggie, in that the world must live by your standards. Not wise, but then its all emotion, idn't it? The Taliban had nothing operationally to do with 911 – Bullshit, because the head of the Taleban had one of his daughters married to Bin Laden, and had invited Binny in, funded him. I wonder what the firemen you say you hugged would feel had they read your analysis of the world? My guess is they wouldn't feel good. Yeah like that won the war LOL – I witnessed the end of that war in person and it was not an American victory. So what did dropping more tons of explosive on Indochina than in all theaters of WWII put together accomplish? What objective was achieved? I was living there during the last year of that “peace”. I saw that “peace” with my own eyes. You really don’t have a clue do you… peace, what peace? Getting the US to grovel before the world hasn't have seemed to make things any better, now has it? However, its what BHO and the progressive mind want, so it's how it shall be. -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sat, Jun 28, 2014 1:33 pm Subject: RE: American Intelligence From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] Addressing questions. Its a debacle more over the last 5 years then before, but yes, it sucked. On the other hand, I am more bloody-minded then Bushie was (I suspect this is because of his friendship with the Saudi royals) and I would have done Afghanistan and the Pakistan circa Oct 200, for the Bin Laden thing, and would have wiped out anyone protecting him-so please realize who your are arguing with. Oh… I realize who I am arguing with – a couch potato general who has never tasted war, wishing war (for others to wage in distant lands). One question Rambo, you had your chance, why didn’t you go yourself? The clash of civilizations was ever true and is more true today. I take it, Chris, that you are not a dweller in the UK or Spain with the subway bombings? I suspect that lack of cause and effect influences your opinion aside from pure ideology? A guess, no more. I have lived in both the UK and in Spain and visited several other times. I was also living in the NYC metro area on 911 and saw the aftermath with my own eyes in person.. I hugged the firemen who were in tears balling like babies – the ones who had lost 80% of their colleagues on that day… I walked through the streets with the flowers and candles burning and experienced the human trauma of that terror act of outsized scale. The day of 911 I was working to set up a fallback crisis response center for the Associated Press (for whom I was developing software at the time), in case headquarters in Rockefeller center also got hit (in those first hours no one really knew the scope of this act) Where were you? I support mil actions as long as its fought like total war. Think WW2. Note, that nuanced responses have done little since WW2, although the Korean War is the most solid, maybe? If its worth fighting, then its worth willing to the max. Neither Bushie nor, Obama hold this position as something they want. Otherwise, try bribes, incentives and all that diplomacy provides-just don't expect it to work. It really has not. Good thing for us all that you are just a couch potato general then. Since 9-11 was launched with Taliban support, how were we not going to trouble them? Be peaceful so we can make progressives feel better? The Taliban had nothing operationally to do with 911 – they may have been medieval minded intolerant fundamentalist fascists who were harboring Al Qaida (who had fought side by side with them to drive the Russians from Afghanistan, and who for decades had been funded, armed and trained by the way by the US CIA and military based on the same realpolitik rational). But they were not involved with 911? And the afghan, farmers, goat and sheep herders (90% of the country) how exactly where they involved generalissimo? The failure of Bush was failure to fight to win, a novel thing in this day and age. What could we have done outside of boots on the ground. Answer-carpet bombing as we did in Haiphong Harbor in North Vietnam. It actually brought peace, a truce for 2+ years, before the North took over. Yeah like that won the war
Re: American Intelligence
Having a hissy-fit, or a Chrissy fit? War, is something to survive if one can, to win, or avoid fighting in the first place. Now if you want to discuss and sort through what policies work, and what policies do not, that is interesting. The progressive side of things is all amygdala, and these policies seems to be based on this. In the 19th century, French social philosopher, Gustave Le Bon, pretty much nailed it, with his treatise, The Crowd. Even though its a very, old, work, it still seems spot-on! Both Adolf and Lenin wuved it. You are absolutely a coward in your war “actions” though…. War, for you, is for other people to fight. Chris -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sat, Jun 28, 2014 1:35 pm Subject: RE: American Intelligence From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2014 5:10 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: American Intelligence Not disagreeing with Brent, but realpolitik only works when you like the outcome. I tend to be absolutist in my war views, so the nuances are wasted on me. You are absolutely a coward in your war “actions” though…. War, for you, is for other people to fight. Chris It is however, what's the result at the end of the day. The biggest question is, what is the national interest? Usually it means whatever pleases the super rich. If you happen to be on Soros or the Koch's side, then all is good. If not...? It's called realpolitik. Do you want the President to choose who to support based on their morality and disregard the national interest? And how would you measure their morality? Maybe the real plan is to keep any one murderous faction from winning so they keep fighting till they've all killed each other. Brent -Original Message- From: meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Jun 26, 2014 11:57 pm Subject: Re: American Intelligence On 6/26/2014 8:45 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List wrote: From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard Ruquist Spud, I will fault Obama for supporting the ISIS in Syria but opposing them in Iraq. Richard It amazed me how they tried to rebrand these intolerant murderous A-holes as freedom fighters when these dogs of war became useful tools again in Syria. From Al-Qaida our immortal enemies to “freedom fighters” just like that, given the old Madison Avenue makeover. The cynicism of the power knows no bounds and has no decency at all in its old vampire bones. It's called realpolitik. Do you want the President to choose who to support based on their morality and disregard the national interest? And how would you measure their morality? Maybe the real plan is to keep any one murderous faction from winning so they keep fighting till they've all killed each other. Brent -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: American Intelligence
Chickenhawk, a phrase created by US Left-turds, basically attempts to shame their opposites into silence. But what if the opposition is like a progressive, in which they have no shame? :-) Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, I have read already (13 rules) and found his advice, quite good. I want the US to survive, at least a while longer. The Christians await the return of Jesus, the Transhumanists await the arrival of the Singularity, the progressives await the triumph of 'world socialism. I want the US to survive and prosper. It's current leadership is geared to providing for some of the desires of its funders and client-new poor. Progressive policies are now unraveling as war increases in the Ukraine, Nigeria, Iraq, Syria, and the power vacuum will be filled. Let us see who fills this power vacuum? You are an American Nationalist who wants others to go die for you… essentially. My question, which I repeat, if you are so gung ho about some kind of clash of civilizations then how come you are not on the front lines fighting your crusade? Or do you prefer that others do the dying while you get to wax on with your self-righteous attitude? While you take care to keep yourself well out of harm’s way… A chickenhawk: One, who is a hawk, but only when it is others who are doing the dying. -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sat, Jun 28, 2014 8:09 pm Subject: RE: American Intelligence From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] Well, of one takes the actions or inactions of gov leaders, specifically, U.S., then there is a lot at stake to lose. I am, whatever it's worth, far different, from what Fox views editorially. For instance, Rupert Murdoch is meeting with Obama advisor, Valerie Jarrett on promoting more immigration from Latin America. That is different then how I feel. Secondly, most US media are never critical of Obama's governance, because he is a fellow progressive, and the first black president. No criticisms, just support. Oh believe I am an American nationalist, but a pragmatic one. I always ask what has been achieved if anything? You are an American Nationalist who wants others to go die for you… essentially. My question, which I repeat, if you are so gung ho about some kind of clash of civilizations then how come you are not on the front lines fighting your crusade? Or do you prefer that others do the dying while you get to wax on with your self-righteous attitude? While you take care to keep yourself well out of harm’s way… A chickenhawk: One, who is a hawk, but only when it is others who are doing the dying. Moreover, Using ponder where, as a species we want to be? The only thing anyone needs to fear from the ineffectual Fox News, is when somebody screws up and then lies about it. Lastly, I don't see Fox as having all that much clout, so your displeasure with them is likely, a waste of bradykinans, the brain chemical. -Original Message- From: Platonist Guitar Cowboy multiplecit...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: 28-Jun-2014 10:41:40 + Subject: Re: American Intelligence On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 2:10 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: Not disagreeing with Brent, but realpolitik only works when you like the outcome. I tend to be absolutist in my war views, so the nuances are wasted on me. Indeed, often you sound as absolutist as the militant FOX bitch, Liz posted yesterday. Not that I mind, but it's worth pointing out, I guess. PGC It is however, what's the result at the end of the day. The biggest question is, what is the national interest? Usually it means whatever pleases the super rich. If you happen to be on Soros or the Koch's side, then all is good. If not...? It's called realpolitik. Do you want the President to choose who to support based on their morality and disregard the national interest? And how would you measure their morality? Maybe the real plan is to keep any one murderous faction from winning so they keep fighting till they've all killed each other. Brent -Original Message- From: meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Jun 26, 2014 11:57 pm Subject: Re: American Intelligence On 6/26/2014 8:45 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List wrote: From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard Ruquist Spud, I will fault Obama for supporting the ISIS in Syria but opposing them in Iraq. Richard It amazed me how they tried to rebrand these intolerant murderous A-holes as freedom fighters when these dogs of war became useful tools again in Syria. From Al-Qaida our immortal enemies to “freedom
Re: Pluto bounces back!
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 5:03 AM, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 1:31 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy multiplecit...@gmail.com wrote: I respect a possible god's creation more than thinking it somebody's job to convert people. This makes god's magnificence, as you call it, very small. I still have no idea of whether you see the blaspheme problem here or not. PGC We agree that it is blasphemy to attribute to God or make statements on God's behalf what God hasn't stated. However, we also consider it blasphemy to deny God or God's communication, pretending that God hasn't sent any message, when God has indeed provided guidance for humans. I don't know this and I challenge you, the Quran, indeed anybody, to provide convincing evidence. Your claim in this regard, could be the very blasphemy you speak of. You seem to think that the Message is for a particular culture, I tell you its for all humanity from the Lord of the Worlds. Cultures compete. War is our collective history. If I grow up in Jewish or Christian background, this preselects me to be more accessible to Jewish or Christian theology/books/interpretations than to Quran. Ok, the Quran is for all culture; but then the Bible says the same. You still avoid the question of why the Quran above all other sacred books. If this were a matter of personal religion, that would be private. But since you want factual accuracy, and to tie scientific/rational approach to Quran, the question is valid. Science, ability to doubt, question, and strive for accuracy in facts and descriptions belongs to all of us, no matter the religion. God doesn't need us or our service, it is we who need God and God's guidance, since it is our future that depends on our beliefs and actions. If God had wanted an army of slaves, he would not allow them to think and doubt. He could build an army of robot zombies, that he wouldn't even need to test. This testing idea, and why a supreme being would engage in testing a perfect creation, makes no sense to me. It seems it could be misused to frighten and control people. If a writing can be used to control people, to manipulate them dishonestly, to blaspheme god's name for violence, how perfect is this writing/book? Wouldn't a perfect writing stop this from happening? Just as we have no choice over our own self's birth and death, similarly we have no choice in being resurrected for an immortal life. How do you know God has stated this as fact? Yes, some people state this in some books. But perhaps these are statements that, in your words, constitute blasphemy to attribute to God or make statements on God's behalf what God hasn't stated. Yes, it could be god's greatness, but it could also be people trying to control others through fear. Our future well-being depends on the sincerity of our thoughts and actions in the present! On this we agree. PGC -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Germany sets record for peak energy use - 50 percent comes from solar (Update)
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: Possibly the worst nuclear fission by product is Cessium-137 Fission It's far from the worst but Cessium-137 is certainly dangerous and must be dealt with carefully. Even a LFTR produces nuclear waste, just a hell of a lot less of it than the solid fuel Uranium reactors we use today. Any design that relies on active safety features has a catastrophic potential And LFTR's are walk away safe, when the liquid fuel gets hotter it expands and the fission process slows down as a result. And the working temperature of the liquid is 800 degrees Centigrade but the salt doesn't boil till 1400 giving you a huge safety margin. And a LFTR doesn't operate at 160 times atmospheric pressure as today's reactors do, instead it operates at exactly ONE atmospheric pressure, so you don't have to make everything so thick and expensive, and even if there were a leak it wouldn't be a catastrophe. And a LFTR doesn't make Plutonium, present reactors do. And you don't need a human operator to notice that things are getting too hot and figure out that it might be a good idea to shut the reactor down, instead the freeze plug melts due to the laws of thermodynamics and then the fuel drains out of the reactor into a holding tank and the fission reaction stops. And you don't need expensive high tech emergency pumps, you just need the law of gravity. But no such reactors exist. One cannot make positivist statements about a system, until one has actually built the only thing stopping it from being a full fledged LFTR is that the U233 was bred from Thorium in another reactor. It's true that it will take some RD before a full fledged LFTR is built, but it would be trivial compared with what has already been spent on fusion research, and we're still very far away from even a prototype fusion reactor. Kennedy decided that the USA should go to the moon in 1962 and in 1969 they were on the moon, and far more technological advancement was needed to achieve that than to make a LFTR. Even though it had a miniscule budget a liquid fuel U233 reactor (called the MSR) was built and operated successfully from 1965 to 1969; the only thing stopping it from being a full fledged LFTR is that the U233 was bred from Thorium in another reactor. Unfortunately Richard Nixon cancelled the MSR program in 1969 and a few years later Nixon fired Alvin Weinberg the chief engineer of the MSR and the inventor of the LFTR concept. Nixon felt that other types of reactors were just a distraction and all efforts should be put on the pressurized water reactors that we use today in power stations and submarines. It's ironic that Weinberg was also the inventor of the pressurized water reactor, but when he started expressing doubts about his own invention and insisting the LFTR's were the way to go Nixon gave him the boot. I think history will say this was a greater blunder than anything Nixon did in Watergate, it certainly harmed his country more. We'd be living in a very different world if Nixon had made a different decision back in the late 1960's. It is illustrative to look at the real world example of the world’s only large scale serious attempt to build a fast breeder power plant. Fast breeder reactors use fast neutrons and solid fuel to turn U238 into Plutonium, LFTR's use slow neutrons and liquid fuel to turn Thorium into U233. The reactor was especially plagued with problems with its sodium coolant systems Molten Sodium catches fire spontaneously in the air and explodes in the presence of water, LFTR's use fluoride salt which is known for its chemical stability even at very high temperatures. Solid fuel Uranium breeders suck. LFTR's don't. if you're waiting for a energy source that is 100% clean and is so safe that the very laws of physics guarantee it will never harm a single person or animal then you're going to be waiting forever; and while your waiting for perfection people will increase their use of enormously dirty and dangerous crap like coal which has killed orders of magnitude more people than nuclear ever has even if you count Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I would not put nuclear power and perfection in the same sentence The safety record of nuclear power plants is not perfect, but if you compare them to the safety record of any other sort of power plant it's about as close to perfection as you will find on this planet. John K Clark -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Germany sets record for peak energy use - 50 percent comes from solar (Update)
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 6:42 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: There is no way on earth that environmentalists are going to convince the world powers to get rid of nuclear submarines, so it's a waste of time to even mention them. Yes there is. Ignoring a problem doesn't magically make it nonexistent. In my opinion life is too short to worry about insoluble problems, but there is no disputing matters of taste. You're missing the point. Radioactive material is a different SORT of contaminant to anything produced by coal (apart from traces of radioactive material in coal). It's one hell of a lot more than a trace! The fly ash from a coal power plant injects 100 times as much radiation into the environment as a nuclear power plant of equal electrical output; not to mention manufacturing a vast amount of CO2 and a witches brew of toxic chemicals that a nuclear plant doesn't produce at all. John K Clark -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Selecting your future branch
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 3:54 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: the H-guy cannot be sure about its future 1-view *from the unique 1-view Unique? That implies that there is one and only one correct answer to the question of what the Helsinki Man will see, so after the exparament is over there should be enough information to know what that one correct answer should have been. So what was it? Would that that one unique correct prediction have been Washington or Moscow? Before you flip a coin you don't know if the correct prediction is heads or tails, but at least after you flip it you know what the correct prediction would have been; but in your thought exparament even after all the dust has settled there still isn't one correct answer. The difference is that although the bodies of the Helsinki Man is duplicated there is still only one Helsinki Man until one copy sees something the other doesn't. The Helsinki Man only turns into the Moscow Man when he sees Moscow and not before; so the only unique correct prediction is that the Moscow man will be the Man who sees Moscow. What more could you expect? predict with certainlty the unique city you will see The city who will see? The H-guy. I predict that the H-guy will see Helsinki, unless you destroy him immediately after duplication in which case the H-guy will see absolutely nothing. I further predict that Mr. You will see Moscow AND Washington because MR. YOU HAS BEEN DUPLICATED. you forget also the question asked, which is about what you will live [...] What who will live? in the 1p sense from the 1p view and not any 3p view on where those unique 1-view appears. That's just a tad too much peepee for my taste. You are not answering the question asked. That's because the question asked is gibberish. You want to know which one of the 2 will see Moscow, but there is only one not two, there is no 2 until one sees Moscow and the other does not. The Moscow Man will be the one who sees Moscow, what more do you want me to say for you to count it as a successful prediction? John K Clark -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 9:44 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: agnosticism is of course the defining principle of the scientific method, so we really need the concept in order to understand the status of scientific theories. I like what Isaac Asimov, a fellow who knew a thing or two about science, had to say on this subject: I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellectually unrespectable to say one was an atheist, because it assumed knowledge that one didn't have. Somehow, it was better to say one was a humanist or an agnostic. I finally decided that I'm a creature of emotion as well as of reason. Emotionally, I am an atheist. I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time. John K Clark -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: I care about the notion behind. Call it the ONE Let's call it the BULLSHIT. Why not. But it can be confusing. I don't see how THE BULLSHIT is more confusing than THE ONE. It looks like according to you we just have no right to raise doubts on the Aristotelian Primary Matter notion. Why in hell do we keep talking about ancient ignoramuses like Plotinus and the worst physicist who ever lived, Aristotle? PS I think I will come back to the term god as it is less confusing than bullshit, to refer to the unknown cause or reason of why we are here. So these are the properties of God: 1) God does not answer prayers. 2) God is not omnipotent. 3) God is not omniscient. 4) God is not intelligent. 5) God is not conscious. 6) God has nothing to do with morality. 7) God is not a being at all just some sort of vague undefined principle. That sure doesn't leave much stuff for God to do, so it shouldn't bother us very much that even that wimpy anemic low rent sort of God may not exist; there may be no cause for the universe, there may be no reason there is something rather than nothing, there may be no ultimate reason we exist. John K Clark John K Clark -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?
in effect the non-cloning theorem prevents saying yes to the doctor if you insist on there being no discontinuity in your consciousness. Only if a change in your quantum state causes a discontinuity in your consciousness, but your quantum state changes hundreds of thousands of millions of billions of trillions of times a second. And by the way, what does a discontinuity in your consciousness even mean? John K Clark -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
RE: American Intelligence
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 5:48 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: American Intelligence Oh… I realize who I am arguing with – a couch potato general who has never tasted war, wishing war (for others to wage in distant lands). One question Rambo, you had your chance, why didn’t you go yourself? Chrissy, your tautings tend to resemble the last resort of the progressive. to which I shrug in response. I visited the WTC ruins in Nov 2001, and my nephew and his wife worked and lived in Manhattan back then, and saw the attacks close up, that day,and -so did lots of people, Being self righteous, is also typical of the proggie, in that the world must live by your standards. Not wise, but then its all emotion, idn't it? I can see by the fact that you are now calling me “Chrissy” that I must have hit a nerve in your chickenhawk manhood such as it is. Just calling like I see it. I am not self-righteously calling for a major world-wide total war, for the killing of millions of people – what I am doing is calling you out for your war mongering rhetoric. You incessantly and loudly call for a world war – e.g. your clash of civilizations – but you do it from the safety of your couch…. e.g. you are a couch potato general. You are a war mongering couch potato. You could rectify this by going to your nearest recruitment center and volunteering to go fight yourself, but somehow chickenhawks -- like you -- never get around, to actually going to do any of the fighting (an dying) in the violence you seek to foment. Doesn’t this kind of mean you are in fact a kind of coward? The Taliban had nothing operationally to do with 911 – Bullshit, because the head of the Taleban had one of his daughters married to Bin Laden, and had invited Binny in, funded him. I wonder what the firemen you say you hugged would feel had they read your analysis of the world? My guess is they wouldn't feel good. I do not even buy into the narrative for 911 you have swallowed hook line and sinker; reality is a whole lot murkier than the public story – but I will not get into that on this list. SO what if the Taliban leader had a daughter who was married to Bin Laden – who had – putting it in context – been one of the leaders of the Mujahedeen in the long struggle – alongside the Taliban and other Afghan resistance forces against the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. What is so surprising about that – and that means nothing. It does not mean that the Taliban were involved. You are full of it if you suggest that because the head of the Taliban’s daughter was married off to Osama Bin Laden that this was a good cause for the US to invade Afghanistan. The United States of America invited Osama Bin Laden into Afghanistan and funded and armed him and the other Mujahedeen with amongst other weapons Stinger anti-aircraft missiles…. Are you a hypocrite? Osama Bin Laden was our dog of war against the Soviets in Afghanistan; it was the USA who funded and built AL Qaida (as we are now once again doing in Syria and Northwestern Iraq… where they have become rebranded as “freedom fighters” (some kind of freedom eh?) Yeah like that won the war LOL – I witnessed the end of that war in person and it was not an American victory. So what did dropping more tons of explosive on Indochina than in all theaters of WWII put together accomplish? What objective was achieved? I was living there during the last year of that “peace”. I saw that “peace” with my own eyes. You really don’t have a clue do you… peace, what peace? Getting the US to grovel before the world hasn't have seemed to make things any better, now has it? However, its what BHO and the progressive mind want, so it's how it shall be. LOL – where is the US groveling? Idiot. The fact is that currently 38% of all the money spent in the whole world on military power is spent by the US on maintaining its military hegemony. How you can construe this actual real posture as even remotely being a form of groveling is some good evidence of just how far removed from reality your own mental constructs have become. Go do some of the fighting and the killing yourself coward; I despise people who scream for war and insinuate that others who do not are somehow traitorous fifth columnist types, especially these who do so from the safety of their peaceful little homes. You are one of those kinds of people… and calling me Chrissy does not transform you into a brave man spudboy. Chris -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sat, Jun 28, 2014 1:33 pm Subject: RE: American Intelligence From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com
RE: American Intelligence
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 5:56 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: American Intelligence Having a hissy-fit, or a Chrissy fit? War, is something to survive if one can, to win, or avoid fighting in the first place. Now if you want to discuss and sort through what policies work, and what policies do not, that is interesting. The progressive side of things is all amygdala, and these policies seems to be based on this. In the 19th century, French social philosopher, Gustave Le Bon, pretty much nailed it, with his treatise, The Crowd. Even though its a very, old, work, it still seems spot-on! Both Adolf and Lenin wuved it. You are absolutely a coward in your war “actions” though…. War, for you, is for other people to fight. Chris Calling me names will not make a man out of you spudboi. You ceaselessly blather on about war and insinuate that those who do not share your sick enthusiasm for it are traitors… all from the safety of your computer… behaving as cowards have been behaving down through the ages. I truly have no respect for loudmouthed jingoistic clowns, such as yourself, who reserve the actual fighting and dying for others to go do. Fight your own damn crusade chickenhawk. Chris -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sat, Jun 28, 2014 1:35 pm Subject: RE: American Intelligence From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com? ] Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2014 5:10 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: American Intelligence Not disagreeing with Brent, but realpolitik only works when you like the outcome. I tend to be absolutist in my war views, so the nuances are wasted on me. You are absolutely a coward in your war “actions” though…. War, for you, is for other people to fight. Chris It is however, what's the result at the end of the day. The biggest question is, what is the national interest? Usually it means whatever pleases the super rich. If you happen to be on Soros or the Koch's side, then all is good. If not...? It's called realpolitik. Do you want the President to choose who to support based on their morality and disregard the national interest? And how would you measure their morality? Maybe the real plan is to keep any one murderous faction from winning so they keep fighting till they've all killed each other. Brent -Original Message- From: meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Jun 26, 2014 11:57 pm Subject: Re: American Intelligence On 6/26/2014 8:45 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List wrote: From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard Ruquist Spud, I will fault Obama for supporting the ISIS in Syria but opposing them in Iraq. Richard It amazed me how they tried to rebrand these intolerant murderous A-holes as freedom fighters when these dogs of war became useful tools again in Syria. From Al-Qaida our immortal enemies to “freedom fighters” just like that, given the old Madison Avenue makeover. The cynicism of the power knows no bounds and has no decency at all in its old vampire bones. It's called realpolitik. Do you want the President to choose who to support based on their morality and disregard the national interest? And how would you measure their morality? Maybe the real plan is to keep any one murderous faction from winning so they keep fighting till they've all killed each other. Brent -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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.
RE: American Intelligence
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 6:05 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: American Intelligence Chickenhawk, a phrase created by US Left-turds, basically attempts to shame their opposites into silence. Haha – being called a coward kind of hurts doesn’t it chickenhawk…. Why so? Perhaps because I have hit the nail on the head. You are gung ho for war, but only when it involves other people. But what if the opposition is like a progressive, in which they have no shame? :-) Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, I have read already (13 rules) and found his advice, quite good. I want the US to survive, at least a while longer. No… you want the world to go down in the firestorm of a clash of civilizations idiot. The Christians await the return of Jesus, the Transhumanists await the arrival of the Singularity, the progressives await the triumph of 'world socialism. I want the US to survive and prosper. Bullshit – you want to drag this country down into the hellish pit of the global clash of civilizations war you imagine is occurring. Step up to the plate, coward and go off to fight on the front line, yourself chickenhawk. Chris It's current leadership is geared to providing for some of the desires of its funders and client-new poor. Progressive policies are now unraveling as war increases in the Ukraine, Nigeria, Iraq, Syria, and the power vacuum will be filled. Let us see who fills this power vacuum? You are an American Nationalist who wants others to go die for you… essentially. My question, which I repeat, if you are so gung ho about some kind of clash of civilizations then how come you are not on the front lines fighting your crusade? Or do you prefer that others do the dying while you get to wax on with your self-righteous attitude? While you take care to keep yourself well out of harm’s way… A chickenhawk: One, who is a hawk, but only when it is others who are doing the dying. -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sat, Jun 28, 2014 8:09 pm Subject: RE: American Intelligence From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com? ] Well, of one takes the actions or inactions of gov leaders, specifically, U.S., then there is a lot at stake to lose. I am, whatever it's worth, far different, from what Fox views editorially. For instance, Rupert Murdoch is meeting with Obama advisor, Valerie Jarrett on promoting more immigration from Latin America. That is different then how I feel. Secondly, most US media are never critical of Obama's governance, because he is a fellow progressive, and the first black president. No criticisms, just support. Oh believe I am an American nationalist, but a pragmatic one. I always ask what has been achieved if anything? You are an American Nationalist who wants others to go die for you… essentially. My question, which I repeat, if you are so gung ho about some kind of clash of civilizations then how come you are not on the front lines fighting your crusade? Or do you prefer that others do the dying while you get to wax on with your self-righteous attitude? While you take care to keep yourself well out of harm’s way… A chickenhawk: One, who is a hawk, but only when it is others who are doing the dying. Moreover, Using ponder where, as a species we want to be? The only thing anyone needs to fear from the ineffectual Fox News, is when somebody screws up and then lies about it. Lastly, I don't see Fox as having all that much clout, so your displeasure with them is likely, a waste of bradykinans, the brain chemical. -Original Message- From: Platonist Guitar Cowboy multiplecit...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: 28-Jun-2014 10:41:40 + Subject: Re: American Intelligence On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 2:10 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: Not disagreeing with Brent, but realpolitik only works when you like the outcome. I tend to be absolutist in my war views, so the nuances are wasted on me. Indeed, often you sound as absolutist as the militant FOX bitch, Liz posted yesterday. Not that I mind, but it's worth pointing out, I guess. PGC It is however, what's the result at the end of the day. The biggest question is, what is the national interest? Usually it means whatever pleases the super rich. If you happen to be on Soros or the Koch's side, then all is good. If not...? It's called realpolitik. Do you want the President to choose who to support based on their morality and disregard the national interest? And how would you measure their morality? Maybe the real plan is to keep any one
Re: Selecting your future branch
Le 29 juin 2014 18:33, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com a écrit : On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 3:54 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: the H-guy cannot be sure about its future 1-view *from the unique 1-view Unique? That implies that there is one and only one correct answer to the question of what the Helsinki Man will see, so after the exparament is over there should be enough information to know what that one correct answer should have been. So what was it? Would that that one unique correct prediction have been Washington or Moscow? Before you flip a coin you don't know if the correct prediction is heads or tails, but at least after you flip it you know what the correct prediction would have been; but in your thought exparament even after all the dust has settled there still isn't one correct answer. The difference is that although the bodies of the Helsinki Man is duplicated there is still only one Helsinki Man until one copy sees something the other doesn't. The Helsinki Man only turns into the Moscow Man when he sees Moscow and not before; so the only unique correct prediction is that the Moscow man will be the Man who sees Moscow. What more could you expect? predict with certainlty the unique city you will see The city who will see? The H-guy. I predict that the H-guy will see Helsinki, unless you destroy him immediately after duplication in which case the H-guy will see absolutely nothing. I further predict that Mr. You will see Moscow AND Washington because MR. YOU HAS BEEN DUPLICATED. I predict liar Clark will see spin up AND spin down... because under MWI MR. LIAR CLARK HAS BEEN DUPLICATED (yes I know it's a nightmare). you forget also the question asked, which is about what you will live [...] What who will live? in the 1p sense from the 1p view and not any 3p view on where those unique 1-view appears. That's just a tad too much peepee for my taste. You are not answering the question asked. That's because the question asked is gibberish. You want to know which one of the 2 will see Moscow, but there is only one not two, there is no 2 until one sees Moscow and the other does not. The Moscow Man will be the one who sees Moscow, what more do you want me to say for you to count it as a successful prediction? John K Clark -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
RE: Germany sets record for peak energy use - 50 percent comes from solar (Update)
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 8:31 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Germany sets record for peak energy use - 50 percent comes from solar (Update) On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: Possibly the worst nuclear fission by product is Cessium-137 Fission It's far from the worst but Cessium-137 is certainly dangerous and must be dealt with carefully. Even a LFTR produces nuclear waste, just a hell of a lot less of it than the solid fuel Uranium reactors we use today. I should have sais short half-life by product, which is what I meant. By the way I am in favor of funding for RD to try to develop a working LFTR reference design and pilot plant scale unit. Then evaluate the potential and take it from there. The current single pass through system is definitely much worse, but then this is the nuclear power infrastructure that is actually deployed and operating. LFTR does not exist in reality (at least yet) Any design that relies on active safety features has a catastrophic potential And LFTR's are walk away safe, when the liquid fuel gets hotter it expands and the fission process slows down as a result. And the working temperature of the liquid is 800 degrees Centigrade but the salt doesn't boil till 1400 giving you a huge safety margin. And a LFTR doesn't operate at 160 times atmospheric pressure as today's reactors do, instead it operates at exactly ONE atmospheric pressure, so you don't have to make everything so thick and expensive, and even if there were a leak it wouldn't be a catastrophe. And a LFTR doesn't make Plutonium, present reactors do. And you don't need a human operator to notice that things are getting too hot and figure out that it might be a good idea to shut the reactor down, instead the freeze plug melts due to the laws of thermodynamics and then the fuel drains out of the reactor into a holding tank and the fission reaction stops. And you don't need expensive high tech emergency pumps, you just need the law of gravity. Why has the nuclear sector stayed away from LFTR and favored the current type of reactor design? By the way I really like the walk away passive safety feature about the LFTR reference designs I have seen – the freeze plug is so simple and also so effective… it can work for LFTR because the fuel/breeding stock in an LFTR is a hot liquid, which can drain. Fuel rods can’t do that trick. You won’t get any arguments from me against LFTR as being the most preferable breeder type out there. (seemingly because we do not have any actual operating LFTR power plants yet to evaluate) But no such reactors exist. One cannot make positivist statements about a system, until one has actually built the only thing stopping it from being a full fledged LFTR is that the U233 was bred from Thorium in another reactor. It's true that it will take some RD before a full fledged LFTR is built, but it would be trivial compared with what has already been spent on fusion research, and we're still very far away from even a prototype fusion reactor. Kennedy decided that the USA should go to the moon in 1962 and in 1969 they were on the moon, and far more technological advancement was needed to achieve that than to make a LFTR. By all means – I agree we should have an LFTR program. Even though it had a miniscule budget a liquid fuel U233 reactor (called the MSR) was built and operated successfully from 1965 to 1969; the only thing stopping it from being a full fledged LFTR is that the U233 was bred from Thorium in another reactor. Unfortunately Richard Nixon cancelled the MSR program in 1969 and a few years later Nixon fired Alvin Weinberg the chief engineer of the MSR and the inventor of the LFTR concept. Nixon felt that other types of reactors were just a distraction and all efforts should be put on the pressurized water reactors that we use today in power stations and submarines. It's ironic that Weinberg was also the inventor of the pressurized water reactor, but when he started expressing doubts about his own invention and insisting the LFTR's were the way to go Nixon gave him the boot. I think history will say this was a greater blunder than anything Nixon did in Watergate, it certainly harmed his country more. We'd be living in a very different world if Nixon had made a different decision back in the late 1960's. Perhaps so, but we live in the world we do live in.. and we need to move forward based on the actual situation we find ourselves in. It is illustrative to look at the real world example of the world’s only large scale serious attempt to build a fast breeder power plant. Fast breeder reactors use fast neutrons and solid fuel to turn U238 into Plutonium, LFTR's use slow neutrons
RE: Germany sets record for peak energy use - 50 percent comes from solar (Update)
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 8:37 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Germany sets record for peak energy use - 50 percent comes from solar (Update) On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 6:42 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: There is no way on earth that environmentalists are going to convince the world powers to get rid of nuclear submarines, so it's a waste of time to even mention them. Yes there is. Ignoring a problem doesn't magically make it nonexistent. In my opinion life is too short to worry about insoluble problems, but there is no disputing matters of taste. You're missing the point. Radioactive material is a different SORT of contaminant to anything produced by coal (apart from traces of radioactive material in coal). It's one hell of a lot more than a trace! The fly ash from a coal power plant injects 100 times as much radiation into the environment as a nuclear power plant of equal electrical output; not to mention manufacturing a vast amount of CO2 and a witches brew of toxic chemicals that a nuclear plant doesn't produce at all. This is a valid point up to a point. Unless the world goes to a breeder reactor system, the current nuclear power plants have produced a legacy of high level nuclear waste that will require incredibly long term sequestration (unless it gets burned up in re-processing system) Chris John K Clark -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: American Intelligence
On 30 June 2014 00:55, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: Having a hissy-fit, or a Chrissy fit? War, is something to survive if one can, to win, or avoid fighting in the first place. Now if you want to discuss and sort through what policies work, and what policies do not, that is interesting. The progressive side of things is all amygdala, and these policies seems to be based on this. In the 19th century, French social philosopher, Gustave Le Bon, pretty much nailed it, with his treatise, The Crowd. Even though its a very, old, work, it still seems spot-on! Both Adolf and Lenin wuved it. It isn't, however, limited to any political wing (e.g. just to proggies -- Why do you think Adolf loved it?) -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: American Intelligence
On 30 June 2014 06:04, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: You are full of it if you suggest that because the head of the Taliban’s daughter was married off to Osama Bin Laden that this was a good cause for the US to invade Afghanistan. Jeez. Forgive my weird mind but somehow the phrase the ultimate shtogun wedding popped up when I read that. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: American Intelligence
PS I am all in favour of free speech but this thread is starting to look like Fight Club. Maybe a few deep breaths, everyone? -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
RE: American Intelligence
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 12:09 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: American Intelligence On 30 June 2014 06:04, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: You are full of it if you suggest that because the head of the Taliban’s daughter was married off to Osama Bin Laden that this was a good cause for the US to invade Afghanistan. Jeez. Forgive my weird mind but somehow the phrase the ultimate shtogun wedding popped up when I read that. No kidding… somehow I do not think the young lady ever fell in love. Chris -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Is Consciousness Computable?
On 29 June 2014 20:04, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: With comp, what i showed is that we have indeed to extract the law of the qubits (quantum logic) from the laws of the bits (the laws of Boole, + Boolos). IMO, Everett + decoherence already shows the road qubits to bits. But comp provides a double (by G/G*) reverse of that road, which separates quanta and qualia (normally, although quanta must be a first person plural). It sounds to me as though you are saying that information is real if arithmetic is real...? What do you mean by real here? The question is not so much about what is real, but about what is primitively real. With computationalism, and the TOE chosen, 0, s(0), ... and + and * are primitively real, as we assume the RA axioms. Information is derived from it, both the classical one, and the quantum one. But a physicist like Landauer(*) would say that information is real because it is an essentially physical things: (*) http://www.uni-leipzig.de/~biophy09/Biophysik-Vorlesung_2009-2010_DATA/QUELLEN/LIT/A/B/3/Landauer_1996_physical_nature_information.pdf (If so, deriving the entropy of a black hole would be support for comp :-) I don't see why. It would be consistent with Landauer's notion of physical information, ISTM. Maybe I jumped the gun here, or something. Deriving the entropy of a black hole seems to me - upon reflection - to show that information is physically real, so it makes it as real as the physical world. According to comp the physical world is not primitively real, so information would be not primitively real either. However, it WOULD be physically real, which is a step away from just something convenient for humans to use (like temperature, as mentioned elsewhere). This seems to accord with fundamental particles appearing to be little bundles of information, which I think is roughly A Garrett Lisi's view, amongst others (JA Wheeler?) -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: American Intelligence
On 30 June 2014 07:12, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: *From:* everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto: everything-list@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *LizR *Sent:* Sunday, June 29, 2014 12:09 PM *To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com *Subject:* Re: American Intelligence On 30 June 2014 06:04, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: You are full of it if you suggest that because the head of the Taliban’s daughter was married off to Osama Bin Laden that this was a good cause for the US to invade Afghanistan. Jeez. Forgive my weird mind but somehow the phrase the ultimate shtogun wedding popped up when I read that. No kidding… somehow I do not think the young lady ever fell in love. I wasn't only thinking of that, but also the (I would say ridiculous) suggestion that it led to the invasion... -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
RE: American Intelligence
Liz – I understand your sentiment; however I am not going to let some jingoistic clown, define anyone who does not share his sicko enthusiasm for global war as being a traitor to his country and so I am calling the coward out. Spudboy (whoever he is), is a person who has never been close to anything that can be called “war zone”, but who keeps calling – in post after post -- for a major global total war – the neocon/jihadist shared sick wet dream of a clash of civilizations that he has bought into. Having witnessed the actual true horror of war myself in person, I find spudboy’s chickenhawk demands for total war and his insinuation that those who do not fall into line are traitors to be particularly obnoxious. Fortunately for you – you do not live in the US and so are not directly affected by intolerant people such as him. I do, however live in this country and I will not permit couch potato generals, like spudboy, to have a soapbox on which to spread warmongering poison, while defining anyone who disagrees, as being a traitor. As long, as this individual insists on advocating total war (for others to go die in) I will continue to point out his own personal cowardice and hypocrisy. Chris From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 12:12 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: American Intelligence PS I am all in favour of free speech but this thread is starting to look like Fight Club. Maybe a few deep breaths, everyone? -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: American Intelligence
Agreed, but Mom, he started it! You like to dish it out, but, maybe, don't take it very well. It's hard to say, and even harder to care. My jingoism is a good thing, if its applied to national survival. For example, on energy, I am jingoistic enough to favor the Keystone pipeline, shale fracking, as well, as conservation technologies, pursuing solar and wind, and especially the technical means of storing and transmitting quickly and efficiently, solar and wind power. People are so untrusting of nuclear fission, whether uranium or thorium, that the financial costs, makes it inferior to solar and wind. The traitor thing is a ideological P O V. because they net effect is to destabilize the US. It may be by accident, or simple malpractice, but the MarxistBillionaires' parties seem incapable of making life better and instead making life worse. Frankly the Left worldwide, whether its in Obamaland here, or in Hollande's France destabilizes nation states. and makes life worse, despite their promises. If you want throw in with them, that's your business. Calling me names will not make a man out of you spudboi. You ceaselessly blather on about war and insinuate that those who do not share your sick enthusiasm for it are traitors… all from the safety of your computer… behaving as cowards have been behaving down through the ages. I truly have no respect for loudmouthed jingoistic clowns, such as yourself, who reserve the actual fighting and dying for others to go do. Fight your own damn crusade chickenhawk. Chris -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sun, Jun 29, 2014 2:25 pm Subject: RE: American Intelligence From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 5:56 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: American Intelligence Having a hissy-fit, or a Chrissy fit? War, is something to survive if one can, to win, or avoid fighting in the first place. Now if you want to discuss and sort through what policies work, and what policies do not, that is interesting. The progressive side of things is all amygdala, and these policies seems to be based on this. In the 19th century, French social philosopher, Gustave Le Bon, pretty much nailed it, with his treatise, The Crowd. Even though its a very, old, work, it still seems spot-on! Both Adolf and Lenin wuved it. You are absolutely a coward in your war “actions” though…. War, for you, is for other people to fight. Chris Calling me names will not make a man out of you spudboi. You ceaselessly blather on about war and insinuate that those who do not share your sick enthusiasm for it are traitors… all from the safety of your computer… behaving as cowards have been behaving down through the ages. I truly have no respect for loudmouthed jingoistic clowns, such as yourself, who reserve the actual fighting and dying for others to go do. Fight your own damn crusade chickenhawk. Chris -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sat, Jun 28, 2014 1:35 pm Subject: RE: American Intelligence From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2014 5:10 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: American Intelligence Not disagreeing with Brent, but realpolitik only works when you like the outcome. I tend to be absolutist in my war views, so the nuances are wasted on me. You are absolutely a coward in your war “actions” though…. War, for you, is for other people to fight. Chris It is however, what's the result at the end of the day. The biggest question is, what is the national interest? Usually it means whatever pleases the super rich. If you happen to be on Soros or the Koch's side, then all is good. If not...? It's called realpolitik. Do you want the President to choose who to support based on their morality and disregard the national interest? And how would you measure their morality? Maybe the real plan is to keep any one murderous faction from winning so they keep fighting till they've all killed each other. Brent -Original Message- From: meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Jun 26, 2014 11:57 pm Subject: Re: American Intelligence On 6/26/2014 8:45 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List wrote: From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard Ruquist Spud, I will fault Obama for supporting the ISIS in Syria but opposing them in Iraq. Richard It amazed me how they tried to rebrand these intolerant murderous A-holes as freedom fighters
Re: American Intelligence
Chris, you can relax, your stuff doesn't zing, so please continue. Chickhawk or chicken fries, its the same. Chickfries, I am proud to say is an American invention, right up there with the Apollo spacecraft. Keeping thinking about what progressives want and keep thinking destablization. Then, there are people that are against destabilization (like me!). Haha – being called a coward kind of hurts doesn’t it chickenhawk…. Why so? Perhaps because I have hit the nail on the head. You are gung ho for war, but only when it involves other people. -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sun, Jun 29, 2014 2:31 pm Subject: RE: American Intelligence From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 6:05 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: American Intelligence Chickenhawk, a phrase created by US Left-turds, basically attempts to shame their opposites into silence. Haha – being called a coward kind of hurts doesn’t it chickenhawk…. Why so? Perhaps because I have hit the nail on the head. You are gung ho for war, but only when it involves other people. But what if the opposition is like a progressive, in which they have no shame? :-) Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, I have read already (13 rules) and found his advice, quite good. I want the US to survive, at least a while longer. No… you want the world to go down in the firestorm of a clash of civilizations idiot. The Christians await the return of Jesus, the Transhumanists await the arrival of the Singularity, the progressives await the triumph of 'world socialism. I want the US to survive and prosper. Bullshit – you want to drag this country down into the hellish pit of the global clash of civilizations war you imagine is occurring. Step up to the plate, coward and go off to fight on the front line, yourself chickenhawk. Chris It's current leadership is geared to providing for some of the desires of its funders and client-new poor. Progressive policies are now unraveling as war increases in the Ukraine, Nigeria, Iraq, Syria, and the power vacuum will be filled. Let us see who fills this power vacuum? You are an American Nationalist who wants others to go die for you… essentially. My question, which I repeat, if you are so gung ho about some kind of clash of civilizations then how come you are not on the front lines fighting your crusade? Or do you prefer that others do the dying while you get to wax on with your self-righteous attitude? While you take care to keep yourself well out of harm’s way… A chickenhawk: One, who is a hawk, but only when it is others who are doing the dying. -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sat, Jun 28, 2014 8:09 pm Subject: RE: American Intelligence From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] Well, of one takes the actions or inactions of gov leaders, specifically, U.S., then there is a lot at stake to lose. I am, whatever it's worth, far different, from what Fox views editorially. For instance, Rupert Murdoch is meeting with Obama advisor, Valerie Jarrett on promoting more immigration from Latin America. That is different then how I feel. Secondly, most US media are never critical of Obama's governance, because he is a fellow progressive, and the first black president. No criticisms, just support. Oh believe I am an American nationalist, but a pragmatic one. I always ask what has been achieved if anything? You are an American Nationalist who wants others to go die for you… essentially. My question, which I repeat, if you are so gung ho about some kind of clash of civilizations then how come you are not on the front lines fighting your crusade? Or do you prefer that others do the dying while you get to wax on with your self-righteous attitude? While you take care to keep yourself well out of harm’s way… A chickenhawk: One, who is a hawk, but only when it is others who are doing the dying. Moreover, Using ponder where, as a species we want to be? The only thing anyone needs to fear from the ineffectual Fox News, is when somebody screws up and then lies about it. Lastly, I don't see Fox as having all that much clout, so your displeasure with them is likely, a waste of bradykinans, the brain chemical. -Original Message- From: Platonist Guitar Cowboy multiplecit...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: 28-Jun-2014 10:41:40 + Subject: Re: American Intelligence On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 2:10 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: Not disagreeing with Brent, but realpolitik only works
Re: American Intelligence
Oh, absolutely true. But Lenin did as well, and no word about Stalin or Mao. My sense of the temptation of The Crowd, seems nowadays, a proggie feature, to feel the buzz, let me say of having a 'Black' president, versus, how's unemployment doing? or What's the best way to afford a national healthcare system? It's a different skill set. But the crowd is a Left thing unless we Rightists can come up with the oohs and ahhs! We're greedy, as we don't demand the promise and 'feel' of the check, we want the check. It isn't, however, limited to any political wing (e.g. just to proggies -- Why do you think Adolf loved it?) -Original Message- From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sun, Jun 29, 2014 3:06 pm Subject: Re: American Intelligence On 30 June 2014 00:55, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: Having a hissy-fit, or a Chrissy fit? War, is something to survive if one can, to win, or avoid fighting in the first place. Now if you want to discuss and sort through what policies work, and what policies do not, that is interesting. The progressive side of things is all amygdala, and these policies seems to be based on this. In the 19th century, French social philosopher, Gustave Le Bon, pretty much nailed it, with his treatise, The Crowd. Even though its a very, old, work, it still seems spot-on! Both Adolf and Lenin wuved it. It isn't, however, limited to any political wing (e.g. just to proggies -- Why do you think Adolf loved it?) -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: American Intelligence
It could've been that kind of a thing, but my sense of it, was that it was a political wedding. The behavior of the Taliban, in Afghanistan, and Pakistan, before 9-11 was identical. Murderous. Chris indicated the two orgs have zero to do with each other, which is crazy, because it was a marriage of convenience, of state. These guys married their young to cement their alliance, Jeez. Forgive my weird mind but somehow the phrase the ultimate shtogun wedding popped up when I read that. -Original Message- From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sun, Jun 29, 2014 3:09 pm Subject: Re: American Intelligence On 30 June 2014 06:04, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: You are full of it if you suggest that because the head of the Taliban’s daughter was married off to Osama Bin Laden that this was a good cause for the US to invade Afghanistan. Jeez. Forgive my weird mind but somehow the phrase the ultimate shtogun wedding popped up when I read that. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
RE: American Intelligence
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 1:16 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: American Intelligence Chris, you can relax, your stuff doesn't zing, so please continue. Chickhawk or chicken fries, its the same. Chickfries, I am proud to say is an American invention, right up there with the Apollo spacecraft. Keeping thinking about what progressives want and keep thinking destablization. Then, there are people that are against destabilization (like me!). I know you feel you are a defender of the faith spudboy… most brownshirts feel this way about themselves. I don’t see you volunteering to go fight in the crusade you seek to ignite, which is why I define you as being a coward. You wish for others to go die in the horror of war, but are too much of a coward to go do the fighting and possibly dying yourself. Look at yourself in the mirror coward – there is no bravery in your empty rhetoric for war. Neo-brownshirt intolerance for other points of view does not imbue you with a patina of bravery either. All it accomplishes is to make you an intolerant coward. I really do despise cowards, who wish for war (for others)…. This should be clear to you by now. All you are is a couch potato generalissimo, who is too much of a coward to follow your own – LOUDLY professed -- conviction and go off to fight in your crusade. Chris Haha – being called a coward kind of hurts doesn’t it chickenhawk…. Why so? Perhaps because I have hit the nail on the head. You are gung ho for war, but only when it involves other people. -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sun, Jun 29, 2014 2:31 pm Subject: RE: American Intelligence From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com? ] Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 6:05 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: American Intelligence Chickenhawk, a phrase created by US Left-turds, basically attempts to shame their opposites into silence. Haha – being called a coward kind of hurts doesn’t it chickenhawk…. Why so? Perhaps because I have hit the nail on the head. You are gung ho for war, but only when it involves other people. But what if the opposition is like a progressive, in which they have no shame? :-) Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, I have read already (13 rules) and found his advice, quite good. I want the US to survive, at least a while longer. No… you want the world to go down in the firestorm of a clash of civilizations idiot. The Christians await the return of Jesus, the Transhumanists await the arrival of the Singularity, the progressives await the triumph of 'world socialism. I want the US to survive and prosper. Bullshit – you want to drag this country down into the hellish pit of the global clash of civilizations war you imagine is occurring. Step up to the plate, coward and go off to fight on the front line, yourself chickenhawk. Chris It's current leadership is geared to providing for some of the desires of its funders and client-new poor. Progressive policies are now unraveling as war increases in the Ukraine, Nigeria, Iraq, Syria, and the power vacuum will be filled. Let us see who fills this power vacuum? You are an American Nationalist who wants others to go die for you… essentially. My question, which I repeat, if you are so gung ho about some kind of clash of civilizations then how come you are not on the front lines fighting your crusade? Or do you prefer that others do the dying while you get to wax on with your self-righteous attitude? While you take care to keep yourself well out of harm’s way… A chickenhawk: One, who is a hawk, but only when it is others who are doing the dying. -Original Message- From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sat, Jun 28, 2014 8:09 pm Subject: RE: American Intelligence From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com? ] Well, of one takes the actions or inactions of gov leaders, specifically, U.S., then there is a lot at stake to lose. I am, whatever it's worth, far different, from what Fox views editorially. For instance, Rupert Murdoch is meeting with Obama advisor, Valerie Jarrett on promoting more immigration from Latin America. That is different then how I feel. Secondly, most US media are never critical of Obama's governance, because he is a fellow progressive, and the first black president. No criticisms, just support. Oh believe I am an American nationalist, but a pragmatic one. I always ask what has been achieved if anything?
Re: American Intelligence
I'm ok with whatever Chris does, its his manner of things. Moreover, First Rule of Fight Club-There IS no Fight Club. PS I am all in favour of free speech but this thread is starting to look like Fight Club. Maybe a few deep breaths, everyone? -Original Message- From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sun, Jun 29, 2014 3:11 pm Subject: Re: American Intelligence PS I am all in favour of free speech but this thread is starting to look like Fight Club. Maybe a few deep breaths, everyone? -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture
On 29 Jun 2014, at 7:19 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: I think it is more related with ego-psychological issue than with the matter subject. Bruno Precisely. Which is why you will understand that to respond any further to the belligerence of his posts is merely an invitation to do battle with his ego rather than to seriously explore the subject? Each post is a trap that he has laid, a bait. Do not take the hameçon. Kim -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: American Intelligence
I support mil actions as long as its fought like total war. Think WW2. Note, that nuanced responses have done little since WW2, although the Korean War is the most solid, maybe? If its worth fighting, then its worth willing to the max. Nuanced responses became quite popular after WW2 because of the invention of atomic bombs. Any civilisation that you can clash with will offer you MAD. Witch is an apt name, because you have to be batshit crazy to desire war. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: RE: American Intelligence
Why, I've never been so humiliated in all me born days! It's so degrading that my nipples are hardening, under your ceaseless castigation.You might be surprised, or not, concerning your Brown Shirt comment, my gruppenfuher. If I recall my history of the late Weimar Republic, the Strumabteilung, had their cohorts in the Kommunist Partei, of the time, called the Red Scarves. Is dot u? The Nazi thing, which despite your hope that I am, is not my political affiliation, nor, even if I was, like that, couldn't pass the pedigree test. But I guess you might? -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: RE: American Intelligence
Let's see. You are not Yank, but you demand that the Americans live up to your standards, do I have this in focus? Secondly, you seem to indicate in past posts, that you are not particularly against war, per second, but specifically against ones we Yanks participate in. Please feel free to correct any misconceptions. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: American Intelligence
-- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
RE: RE: American Intelligence
-Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] Why, I've never been so humiliated in all me born days! It's so degrading that my nipples are hardening, under your ceaseless castigation.You might be surprised, or not, concerning your Brown Shirt comment, my gruppenfuher. If I recall my history of the late Weimar Republic, the Strumabteilung, had their cohorts in the Kommunist Partei, of the time, called the Red Scarves. Is dot u? The Nazi thing, which despite your hope that I am, is not my political affiliation, nor, even if I was, like that, couldn't pass the pedigree test. But I guess you might? I really don't, all that care much about who you are; am making the point that you are a person who is LOUDLY demanding that millions be killed and die in some horrible global war -- this clash of civilizations you have wet dreams of seeing waged, but is too much of a coward to go do the fighting and dying yourself. Better to have others die for you isn't it, coward? If you had ever actually experienced war you would not be so flippant or gung ho about causing it to happen. I have zero respect for couch potato generals like you, who demand global war... and am not all that concerned about your feelings... after all, I am personally calling you a coward, and would do so to your face spudboy (whoever you are). Chris -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?
On 6/29/2014 1:35 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Note that it is an arithmetical fact that arithmetic emulates all simulations. Saying that some of those are more real than other is a metaphysical assumption, and MGA shows that it is a gap-of-the-god type of assumption. But it is not a physical fact that arithmetic exists. And to say that arithmetic emulates all simulations seems to me to 'prove to much'. It's just saying that whatever exists in your physical theory is already in my arithmetical theory. Which is a god-of-the-substrate type argument. Brent -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: RE: RE: American Intelligence
Chris, so how will you be able to live with yourself, if, say, you cannot budge me from my horrible views? Secondly, you are not a US citizen, are you? How will you control America if you cannot even control, influence, or browbeat me? Just curious. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: RE: RE: American Intelligence
Chris, so how will you be able to live with yourself, if, say, you cannot budge me from my horrible views? Secondly, you are not a US citizen, are you? How will you control America if you cannot even control, influence, or browbeat me? Just curious. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Disproving physicalism from COMP
On 26 June 2014 12:03, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 25 June 2014 16:52, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 6/24/2014 2:29 AM, LizR wrote: On 24 June 2014 17:04, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: If primitive matter existed, and if it has a role for consciousness, or for consciousness instantiation, step 8, and the argument above, makes that role very mysterious, so much that it is not clear why we could still say yes to the doctor in virtue of correct digital rendering. You can still say yes to the doctor because he is going to use matter to make your brain prosthesis. Surely that will just be a copy that thinks it's you - it won't be you, so if you are destroyed in the process of making the digital copy, you really do die. While in comp the digital copy *is* you, by definition. ?? Comp is the theory that it will be you after the doctor gives you a prothesis for your brain (plus some other assumptions). It will be you even after you are duplicated (though it's troubling for JKC that you is both singular and plural). Yes, that's right. And primitive materialism would distinguish between two identical versions of you, if only because they occupy different positions (and due to no-cloning). So a PM copy could only ever be a copy that thinks it's you, while a comp copy would be one that actually is you (assuming comp is correct, of course). I don't think comp necessarily includes the idea that the copy would be you, just that the copy would be conscious in the same way as you. Obviously it is *necessary* that the copy be conscious if it is also you, but whether it is *sufficient* is a further argument in the philosophy of personal identity. I think it is sufficient, but not everyone agrees. Derek Partfit's book Reasons and Persons discusses these questions. -- Stathis Papaioannou -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Germany sets record for peak energy use - 50 percent comes from solar (Update)
On 6/29/2014 8:31 AM, John Clark wrote: And a LFTR doesn't make Plutonium, present reactors do. However, a LFTR does make U233, and more that it needs to keep functioning by about 8%. Operating as designed this is contaminated with U232 which makes it unsuitable for a bomb. But if the operators skim out Pa233, which is the precusor to U233, and then let it beta decay to U233 it's not contaminated by U232 and is usable for a bomb. It's harder to make bomb from U233 because it's critical mass is about half again that of plutonium but it has been done. So LFTRs are better than uranium based power plants, but you would still want an inspection regimen in place to prevent proliferation. Brent -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: American Intelligence
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 1:14 AM, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: I tend to agree with your sentiments, Telmo. My idea, should you care, is that if one goes to war, half measures and quarter measures end up quite badly. If one can achieve peace, justice, and free beer, without doing violence to one's fellow primates, this is a great thing. But it is not assured, that simply because one tries a peaceable track, that it will even work. So, if one fights, why hold back? Observe, the results of the US's partial warfare model, and decide for yourself if it has been a brimming success or not? The nuclear war thing, I likely fret more about then any.other participant, on this mailing list. The primary reason for this is that fission, and fusion weapons, are now very old, and the missile tech to carry the bombs are only a bit younger. If I was a citizen of Europe, I would be very concerned that the deliberate diminishment of US power, would invite aggression from places where it would have seemed a laughable, fiction, only a decade ago. To wit, you folks are now on your own, with the current US leadership. It may not bother you, even a bit, but I see that this is a new geopolitical fact. Be well. Uhm... thanks for your help and strategic advise, sir. We, speaking for all european leftist pacifist tree hugging conspirators present, know what to do now: we'll keep relations with US at optimum rimming status as we have done for the last 60 odd years, and you can chill a bit with the right wing spam editorials on the list. That's just the geopolitical situation right now according to PGC HQ (first and therefore most prestigious HQ of the list by far!), you get our allegiance, but we need a bit of freedom in return. You know qpq sir, strengthen troop morale and such. Also we should all take your example and call Russell Prof. Standish or Professor, from now on exclusively! Any slip up with titles and I will ceremonially curse your name with modest restraint in the forest with my scary looking but kind canine; only if nobody is watching though, otherwise it'll look weird which would be going too far. You maggots think you can get away with ignoring the titles of your superiors? 50 Laps and N pushups, all of you except spud: Humans, machines, universal ones, Löbian ones, materialists, immaterialists, physicalists, Darwinists, pantheists, recursive fetishists, atheists, agnostics, idiotics, MSR, P-time nutheads, tronifiers, computationalists, magicians, quantum jerks (with AND without collapse of wave function, I don't care) and the rest of your foul undisciplined ontological technically genderless asses! This is an argument of authority! From an ignorant, hypocrite jerk that doesn't believe in them, no less! Don't provoke me to deter your asses any more than this. Ok? Good. Emulate it. Yes, emulate the goodness. Run it. You won't know whether it'll ever stop. That's better, see? :-) PGC -Original Message- From: Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: 29-Jun-2014 18:35:58 + Subject: Re: American Intelligence I support mil actions as long as its fought like total war. Think WW2. Note, that nuanced responses have done little since WW2, although the Korean War is the most solid, maybe? If its worth fighting, then its worth willing to the max. Nuanced responses became quite popular after WW2 because of the invention of atomic bombs. Any civilisation that you can clash with will offer you MAD. Witch is an apt name, because you have to be batshit crazy to desire war. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: American Intelligence
On 30 June 2014 08:56, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: Oh, absolutely true. But Lenin did as well, and no word about Stalin or Mao. My sense of the temptation of The Crowd, seems nowadays, a proggie feature, to feel the buzz, let me say of having a 'Black' president, versus, how's unemployment doing? or What's the best way to afford a national healthcare system? It's a different skill set. But the crowd is a Left thing Nuremburg rallies. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: American Intelligence
On 30 June 2014 11:14, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: I tend to agree with your sentiments, Telmo. My idea, should you care, is that if one goes to war, half measures and quarter measures end up quite badly. If one can achieve peace, justice, and free beer, without doing violence to one's fellow primates, this is a great thing. But it is not assured, that simply because one tries a peaceable track, that it will even work. So, if one fights, why hold back? Because all out nuclear war would make large chunks of the planet uninhabitable? -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: American Intelligence
On 30 June 2014 12:33, Platonist Guitar Cowboy multiplecit...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 1:14 AM, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: I tend to agree with your sentiments, Telmo. My idea, should you care, is that if one goes to war, half measures and quarter measures end up quite badly. If one can achieve peace, justice, and free beer, without doing violence to one's fellow primates, this is a great thing. But it is not assured, that simply because one tries a peaceable track, that it will even work. So, if one fights, why hold back? Observe, the results of the US's partial warfare model, and decide for yourself if it has been a brimming success or not? The nuclear war thing, I likely fret more about then any.other participant, on this mailing list. The primary reason for this is that fission, and fusion weapons, are now very old, and the missile tech to carry the bombs are only a bit younger. If I was a citizen of Europe, I would be very concerned that the deliberate diminishment of US power, would invite aggression from places where it would have seemed a laughable, fiction, only a decade ago. To wit, you folks are now on your own, with the current US leadership. It may not bother you, even a bit, but I see that this is a new geopolitical fact. Be well. Uhm... thanks for your help and strategic advise, sir. We, speaking for all european leftist pacifist tree hugging conspirators present, know what to do now: we'll keep relations with US at optimum rimming status as we have done for the last 60 odd years, and you can chill a bit with the right wing spam editorials on the list. That's just the geopolitical situation right now according to PGC HQ (first and therefore most prestigious HQ of the list by far!), you get our allegiance, but we need a bit of freedom in return. You know qpq sir, strengthen troop morale and such. Also we should all take your example and call Russell Prof. Standish or Professor, from now on exclusively! Any slip up with titles and I will ceremonially curse your name with modest restraint in the forest with my scary looking but kind canine; only if nobody is watching though, otherwise it'll look weird which would be going too far. You maggots think you can get away with ignoring the titles of your superiors? 50 Laps and N pushups, all of you except spud: Humans, machines, universal ones, Löbian ones, materialists, immaterialists, physicalists, Darwinists, pantheists, recursive fetishists, atheists, agnostics, idiotics, MSR, P-time nutheads, tronifiers, computationalists, magicians, quantum jerks (with AND without collapse of wave function, I don't care) and the rest of your foul undisciplined ontological technically genderless asses! This is an argument of authority! From an ignorant, hypocrite jerk that doesn't believe in them, no less! Don't provoke me to deter your asses any more than this. Ok? Good. Emulate it. Yes, emulate the goodness. Run it. You won't know whether it'll ever stop. That's better, see? :-) PGC May I just say you do a mean free-form stream of consciousness rant, sir? And from now on I expect to be called Your Majesty or Ma'am (LizR, you see...I was trying to keep that under my hat, but you've forced it out). -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: American Intelligence
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 2:53 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 30 June 2014 12:33, Platonist Guitar Cowboy multiplecit...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 1:14 AM, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: I tend to agree with your sentiments, Telmo. My idea, should you care, is that if one goes to war, half measures and quarter measures end up quite badly. If one can achieve peace, justice, and free beer, without doing violence to one's fellow primates, this is a great thing. But it is not assured, that simply because one tries a peaceable track, that it will even work. So, if one fights, why hold back? Observe, the results of the US's partial warfare model, and decide for yourself if it has been a brimming success or not? The nuclear war thing, I likely fret more about then any.other participant, on this mailing list. The primary reason for this is that fission, and fusion weapons, are now very old, and the missile tech to carry the bombs are only a bit younger. If I was a citizen of Europe, I would be very concerned that the deliberate diminishment of US power, would invite aggression from places where it would have seemed a laughable, fiction, only a decade ago. To wit, you folks are now on your own, with the current US leadership. It may not bother you, even a bit, but I see that this is a new geopolitical fact. Be well. Uhm... thanks for your help and strategic advise, sir. We, speaking for all european leftist pacifist tree hugging conspirators present, know what to do now: we'll keep relations with US at optimum rimming status as we have done for the last 60 odd years, and you can chill a bit with the right wing spam editorials on the list. That's just the geopolitical situation right now according to PGC HQ (first and therefore most prestigious HQ of the list by far!), you get our allegiance, but we need a bit of freedom in return. You know qpq sir, strengthen troop morale and such. Also we should all take your example and call Russell Prof. Standish or Professor, from now on exclusively! Any slip up with titles and I will ceremonially curse your name with modest restraint in the forest with my scary looking but kind canine; only if nobody is watching though, otherwise it'll look weird which would be going too far. You maggots think you can get away with ignoring the titles of your superiors? 50 Laps and N pushups, all of you except spud: Humans, machines, universal ones, Löbian ones, materialists, immaterialists, physicalists, Darwinists, pantheists, recursive fetishists, atheists, agnostics, idiotics, MSR, P-time nutheads, tronifiers, computationalists, magicians, quantum jerks (with AND without collapse of wave function, I don't care) and the rest of your foul undisciplined ontological technically genderless asses! This is an argument of authority! From an ignorant, hypocrite jerk that doesn't believe in them, no less! Don't provoke me to deter your asses any more than this. Ok? Good. Emulate it. Yes, emulate the goodness. Run it. You won't know whether it'll ever stop. That's better, see? :-) PGC May I just say you do a mean free-form stream of consciousness rant, sir? And from now on I expect to be called Your Majesty or Ma'am (LizR, you see...I was trying to keep that under my hat, but you've forced it out). Ha! Nothing to be concerned about your majesty, pardon the hypocrisy and the noise. Just our usual existential scuffle in one of the rear barracks. Men are eager for action, get itchy keyboard fingers, 'spite noble intentions and all that. That's where ranting takes me. I'm a horribly incompetent soldier-nazi-cop-chickenhawk. But one can still dream, no? *R *pushups for me! PGC -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Germany sets record for peak energy use - 50 percent comes from solar (Update)
On 30 June 2014 03:36, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 6:42 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: There is no way on earth that environmentalists are going to convince the world powers to get rid of nuclear submarines, so it's a waste of time to even mention them. Yes there is. Ignoring a problem doesn't magically make it nonexistent. In my opinion life is too short to worry about insoluble problems, but there is no disputing matters of taste. If everyone had that attitude nothing would ever get done. We'd still be living in the Middle Ages with the divine right of kings, because after all changing that system would have seem a completely insoluble problem at the time, even if anyone had been able to conceive of doing so. Most problems appear insoluble until you attempt to tackle them. You're missing the point. Radioactive material is a different SORT of contaminant to anything produced by coal (apart from traces of radioactive material in coal). It's one hell of a lot more than a trace! The fly ash from a coal power plant injects 100 times as much radiation into the environment as a nuclear power plant of equal electrical output; not to mention manufacturing a vast amount of CO2 and a witches brew of toxic chemicals that a nuclear plant doesn't produce at all. OK, I was just being devil's advocate to see if you could put up a decent defence of nuclear power (thorium based) since I've been advocating it myself for a while. But someone put the arguments to me that I passed on to you, and I didn't have the facts at my fingertips to argue my case (plus being rather shy in person I probably wouldn't have been able to do so very well even with the facts ... but at least I have some now, so thank you). -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Germany sets record for peak energy use - 50 percent comes from solar (Update)
On 30 June 2014 06:55, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: Why has the nuclear sector stayed away from LFTR and favored the current type of reactor design? One word - bombs. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Selecting your future branch
On 30 June 2014 04:33, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 3:54 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: the H-guy cannot be sure about its future 1-view *from the unique 1-view Unique? That implies that there is one and only one correct answer to the question of what the Helsinki Man will see, so after the exparament is over there should be enough information to know what that one correct answer should have been. So what was it? Would that that one unique correct prediction have been Washington or Moscow? Before you flip a coin you don't know if the correct prediction is heads or tails, but at least after you flip it you know what the correct prediction would have been; but in your thought exparament even after all the dust has settled there still isn't one correct answer. The difference is that although the bodies of the Helsinki Man is duplicated there is still only one Helsinki Man until one copy sees something the other doesn't. The Helsinki Man only turns into the Moscow Man when he sees Moscow and not before; so the only unique correct prediction is that the Moscow man will be the Man who sees Moscow. What more could you expect? predict with certainlty the unique city you will see The city who will see? The H-guy. I predict that the H-guy will see Helsinki, unless you destroy him immediately after duplication in which case the H-guy will see absolutely nothing. I further predict that Mr. You will see Moscow AND Washington because MR. YOU HAS BEEN DUPLICATED. The yes doctor thing says that if H-guy is destroyed in the process of being scanned prior to transmission, then he will see M or W (or both, depending on how you want to look at it. I don't want to get into pronouns at this point). This is counter-intuitive, but it assumes that being cut and pasted like this preserves personal identity. If you accept that yes doctor makes sense (which I have some trouble with myself - as Bruno says, it's a bet) then it follows logically that our moment-to-moment identity is only preserved to the extent that it would be if we were being constantly cut and pasted, like the characters in Star Trek when they go through the transporter. Another way of looking at it is that if H guy is scanned and in the process destroyed, then recreated so that he is identical (below the substitution level -- e.g. this might mean atom for atom, which is where the Heisenberg compensators come into play :-) then his identity and consciousness is recreated with him, and they actually *are* his identity and consciousness, not just a copy which thinks it's him. Yet another way of looking at it is that this sort of process goes on all the time as the cells of our bodies are gradually replaced, and our identity is preserved during cell replacement *to the same extent* that it is preserved by a hypothetical matter transmitter, whatever extent that might be. (PS This is all discussed quite cogently in the Star Trek novel Spock must die! by James Blish, in which Dr McCoy worries that every time someone goes through the transporter, he's being murdered and a clone created which only thinks it's the same person. It also has something very similar to Bruno's thought experiment happen except that the duplicate is in this case an evil twin due to having been mirrored in the process :-) -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?
On 30 June 2014 11:20, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 6/29/2014 1:35 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Note that it is an arithmetical fact that arithmetic emulates all simulations. Saying that some of those are more real than other is a metaphysical assumption, and MGA shows that it is a gap-of-the-god type of assumption. But it is not a physical fact that arithmetic exists. Obviously (surely?) (Although I was under the impression that you think arithmetic is derived from physical facts...?) -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture
On 30 June 2014 04:43, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 9:44 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: agnosticism is of course the defining principle of the scientific method, so we really need the concept in order to understand the status of scientific theories. I like what Isaac Asimov, a fellow who knew a thing or two about science, had to say on this subject: I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellectually unrespectable to say one was an atheist, because it assumed knowledge that one didn't have. Somehow, it was better to say one was a humanist or an agnostic. I finally decided that I'm a creature of emotion as well as of reason. Emotionally, I am an atheist. I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time. So he knows that he only has enough evidence to be agnostic, but he is emotionally convinced to be an atheist nonetheless. OK, so that puts him on a par with religious believers who are also emotionally convinced, though not of the same thing. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
RE: RE: RE: American Intelligence
-Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 5:04 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: RE: RE: American Intelligence Chris, so how will you be able to live with yourself, if, say, you cannot budge me from my horrible views? Secondly, you are not a US citizen, are you? How will you control America if you cannot even control, influence, or browbeat me? Just curious. Oh... no worries mate I will live just fine... don't over-estimate your own importance to me or anyone else... I am merely making the point that you are a war-mongering coward. I don't expect to change you. Who cares if I am a US citizen or not? If I was not a US citizen would I therefore not have the right -- for some strange reason -- to not be calling you a coward? I am however a US citizen, sorry buddy -- see you have to deal with me and millions of other US citizens who think people like you are off their rockers. You see things in the optic of control -- quite telling actually, illuminating in fact of your own psychology that you used that particular term... you see, not everyone sees things the way you see things. Not everyone seeks to control outcomes. I, usually like to work things out, except when dealing with intolerant individuals, such as say yourself spudboy. In such cases, since I know a-priori that there is no working things out I will be right there in your face and have no interest in even trying to work it out -- you don't operate on that wavelength spudboy -- you seek to impose your world view and wish to do so with violent means... you pine for total war A-hole, but are too much of a coward to go do the fighting yourself. No, there is no working anything out with individuals such as you, who portray anyone who does not share their desire for a global conflagration as being a traitor. Thus I do not even bother; why waste any energy. But I will make the point that you are a coward; and have some fun with it. Chris -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
RE: Germany sets record for peak energy use - 50 percent comes from solar (Update)
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 6:43 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Germany sets record for peak energy use - 50 percent comes from solar (Update) On 30 June 2014 06:55, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: Why has the nuclear sector stayed away from LFTR and favored the current type of reactor design? One word - bombs. Well sure there was that – back then at the time; it was a factor. Perhaps subsequently it is a case of the network effect; i.e. of it going off its own momentum. The momentum of the built up supply chain, industrial refining infrastructure, and all the ancillary systems a large scale nuclear sector needs. But why the essentially total absence of even small research scale programs? Chris -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?
On 6/29/2014 10:41 AM, John Clark wrote: Only if a change in your quantum state causes a discontinuity in your consciousness, but your quantum state changes hundreds of thousands of millions of billions of trillions of times a second. And by the way, what does a discontinuity in your consciousness even mean? It's remembering everything up until just before the crash, but nothing between there and waking up in the hospital. Brent -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?
On 30 June 2014 15:50, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 6/29/2014 10:41 AM, John Clark wrote: Only if a change in your quantum state causes a discontinuity in your consciousness, but your quantum state changes hundreds of thousands of millions of billions of trillions of times a second. And by the way, what does a discontinuity in your consciousness even mean? It's remembering everything up until just before the crash, but nothing between there and waking up in the hospital. A simpler example - going to sleep and waking up the next morning. I suppose if one is being pedantic, one might ask is the discontinuity in your consciousness, or (from your point of view) in the outside world. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Germany sets record for peak energy use - 50 percent comes from solar (Update)
On 6/29/2014 6:42 PM, LizR wrote: On 30 June 2014 06:55, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote: Why has the nuclear sector stayed away from LFTR and favored the current type of reactor design? One word - bombs. Maybe indirectly. The problem is that all the engineering and technology development started with uranium reactors. When Rickover was put in charge of development of nuclear submarines he went to Oak Ridge and told Weinberg he wanted a nuclear power plant ASAP. Weinberg, who had invented the pressurized water reactor, told him that PWRs were the wrong way to go and they should develop LFTRs. Rickover didn't have the time for development and so he went to Westinghouse and paid them to build PWRs. Since then, all the experience and regulation has gone to PWRs. It's a lot of technological inertia. Brent -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture
On 6/29/2014 7:33 PM, LizR wrote: On 30 June 2014 04:43, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com mailto:johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 9:44 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com mailto:lizj...@gmail.com wrote: agnosticism is of course the defining principle of the scientific method, so we really need the concept in order to understand the status of scientific theories. I like what Isaac Asimov, a fellow who knew a thing or two about science, had to say on this subject: I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellectually unrespectable to say one was an atheist, because it assumed knowledge that one didn't have. Somehow, it was better to say one was a humanist or an agnostic. I finally decided that I'm a creature of emotion as well as of reason. Emotionally, I am an atheist. I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time. So he knows that he only has enough evidence to be agnostic, but he is emotionally convinced to be an atheist nonetheless. OK, so that puts him on a par with religious believers who are also emotionally convinced, though not of the same thing. No more so that being an aSanta-Clausist. Actually I think there is enough evidence to prove (in the 'beyond reasonable doubt' sense) that the God of the bible does not exist. But you don't have to prove something doesn't exist to reasonably fail to believe that it does. I don't have proof that there is no teapot orbiting Jupiter, but that doesn't make me epitemologically irresponsible to assert I don't believe there is one. Brent -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture
On 30 June 2014 17:02, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 6/29/2014 7:33 PM, LizR wrote: On 30 June 2014 04:43, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 9:44 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: agnosticism is of course the defining principle of the scientific method, so we really need the concept in order to understand the status of scientific theories. I like what Isaac Asimov, a fellow who knew a thing or two about science, had to say on this subject: I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellectually unrespectable to say one was an atheist, because it assumed knowledge that one didn't have. Somehow, it was better to say one was a humanist or an agnostic. I finally decided that I'm a creature of emotion as well as of reason. Emotionally, I am an atheist. I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time. So he knows that he only has enough evidence to be agnostic, but he is emotionally convinced to be an atheist nonetheless. OK, so that puts him on a par with religious believers who are also emotionally convinced, though not of the same thing. No more so that being an aSanta-Clausist. Well there you go then. I rest my case. Actually I think there is enough evidence to prove (in the 'beyond reasonable doubt' sense) that the God of the bible does not exist. But you don't have to prove something doesn't exist to reasonably fail to believe that it does. I don't have proof that there is no teapot orbiting Jupiter, but that doesn't make me epitemologically irresponsible to assert I don't believe there is one. Atheists don't just believe that the biblical god doesn't exist, they believe that there are no supernatural forces involved in the operation of the universe. While I consider this likely, I don't consider it 100% proven, because as Arthur C Clark said, any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic, and it's at least conceivable that there are sufficiently advanced beings out there that they can act outside what we call nature. For example I am not 100% sure that the universe wasn't created by some intelligent beings with sufficiently advanced technology to create big bangs (they may of course have evolved naturally in another universe). I don't think it's likely, but that's my emotional prejudices at work. I can't see that I can claim with certainty that it's impossible, and since these being would fit with some definitions of god (creator of the unvierse) then I can't say it is 100% proven that god doesn't exist. If you are going to narrowly define atheism as not believing in the god of the bible, then of course I will agree with you (I will even throw in the Norse and Egyptian gods and a few others, if you like). But that isn't what I am talking about when I say Atheism, and I doubt it's what Asimov meant either. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Speaking of free speech...
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/06/05/university-college-london-s-nietzsche-club-is-banned.html This is sheer insanity, to quote that bloke from Dad's Army. I can only hope that the Neitzsche Club will not be killed off, but made stronger - and if it *is* full of rabid ideogogues misrepresenting Friedrich's ideas, let them do it in public so everyone can have a good laugh. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture
On 6/29/2014 10:20 PM, LizR wrote: On 30 June 2014 17:02, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 6/29/2014 7:33 PM, LizR wrote: On 30 June 2014 04:43, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com mailto:johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 9:44 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com mailto:lizj...@gmail.com wrote: agnosticism is of course the defining principle of the scientific method, so we really need the concept in order to understand the status of scientific theories. I like what Isaac Asimov, a fellow who knew a thing or two about science, had to say on this subject: I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellectually unrespectable to say one was an atheist, because it assumed knowledge that one didn't have. Somehow, it was better to say one was a humanist or an agnostic. I finally decided that I'm a creature of emotion as well as of reason. Emotionally, I am an atheist. I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time. So he knows that he only has enough evidence to be agnostic, but he is emotionally convinced to be an atheist nonetheless. OK, so that puts him on a par with religious believers who are also emotionally convinced, though not of the same thing. No more so that being an aSanta-Clausist. Well there you go then. I rest my case. Actually I think there is enough evidence to prove (in the 'beyond reasonable doubt' sense) that the God of the bible does not exist. But you don't have to prove something doesn't exist to reasonably fail to believe that it does. I don't have proof that there is no teapot orbiting Jupiter, but that doesn't make me epitemologically irresponsible to assert I don't believe there is one. Atheists don't just believe that the biblical god doesn't exist, they believe that there are no supernatural forces involved in the operation of the universe. Where is this written? Do you speak for all atheists, or just ones in NZ? While I consider this likely, I don't consider it 100% proven, because as Arthur C Clark said, any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic, and it's at least conceivable that there are sufficiently advanced beings out there that they can act outside what we call nature. That seems to really waffle. If we knew these beings could so act wouldn't we just readjust what we call nature. In fact that's a general problem with saying what it would mean for some events to be supernatural. In the past many events were thought to be supernatural, acts of God, e.g. sickness, lightning, drought, earthquakes,...but are now thought to be natural. So it some new phenomena is observed why wouldn't we just assume it was natural even if we didn't have an explanation. For example I am not 100% sure that the universe wasn't created by some intelligent beings with sufficiently advanced technology to create big bangs (they may of course have evolved naturally in another universe). I don't think it's likely, but that's my emotional prejudices at work. I can't see that I can claim with certainty that it's impossible, and since these being would fit with some definitions of god (creator of the unvierse) then I can't say it is 100% proven that god doesn't exist. Didn't you slip from something or someone beyond our current explanation to god. You speak for atheists, what do you have to say for religionists? Are they just worshiping some unknown possibility. What is the god they believe in - that's the god I don't believe in. I think you have muddled the word god in order make it seem unreasonable to assert definitively that god doesn't exist. But in the process you've made god into something quite different from the god of religion. A mere shadow of the once powerful Yaweh, Baal, Zeus, Thor,... If you are going to narrowly define atheism as not believing in the god of the bible, then of course I will agree with you (I will even throw in the Norse and Egyptian gods and a few others, if you like). But that isn't what I am talking about when I say Atheism, and I doubt it's what Asimov meant either. You seem to be equating atheism with asserting that nothing beyond our knowledge of nature exists. Not just failing to believe that such exists, but having 100% confidence that it doesn't. I don't know anyone who calls himself an atheist and who makes such a strong statement. Dawkins has explicity said he is not absolutely certain there is no god of any kind. Vic Stenger explicitly says he cannot rule out a deist god. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Re: Solar power transmission
Oops that should read deficiency of course :-) -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Tyson is not atheist (was Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture
On 30 June 2014 17:41, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 6/29/2014 10:20 PM, LizR wrote: On 30 June 2014 17:02, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 6/29/2014 7:33 PM, LizR wrote: On 30 June 2014 04:43, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 9:44 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: agnosticism is of course the defining principle of the scientific method, so we really need the concept in order to understand the status of scientific theories. I like what Isaac Asimov, a fellow who knew a thing or two about science, had to say on this subject: I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellectually unrespectable to say one was an atheist, because it assumed knowledge that one didn't have. Somehow, it was better to say one was a humanist or an agnostic. I finally decided that I'm a creature of emotion as well as of reason. Emotionally, I am an atheist. I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time. So he knows that he only has enough evidence to be agnostic, but he is emotionally convinced to be an atheist nonetheless. OK, so that puts him on a par with religious believers who are also emotionally convinced, though not of the same thing. No more so that being an aSanta-Clausist. Well there you go then. I rest my case. Actually I think there is enough evidence to prove (in the 'beyond reasonable doubt' sense) that the God of the bible does not exist. But you don't have to prove something doesn't exist to reasonably fail to believe that it does. I don't have proof that there is no teapot orbiting Jupiter, but that doesn't make me epitemologically irresponsible to assert I don't believe there is one. Atheists don't just believe that the biblical god doesn't exist, they believe that there are no supernatural forces involved in the operation of the universe. Where is this written? Do you speak for all atheists, or just ones in NZ? No just the ones I've come across, like Richard Dawkins. While I consider this likely, I don't consider it 100% proven, because as Arthur C Clark said, any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic, and it's at least conceivable that there are sufficiently advanced beings out there that they can act outside what we call nature. That seems to really waffle. If we knew these beings could so act wouldn't we just readjust what we call nature. In fact that's a general problem with saying what it would mean for some events to be supernatural. In the past many events were thought to be supernatural, acts of God, e.g. sickness, lightning, drought, earthquakes,...but are now thought to be natural. So it some new phenomena is observed why wouldn't we just assume it was natural even if we didn't have an explanation. Hmm, well that's all-inclusive. I guess if whatever happens, you will call it natural - Biblical god appears, that's naturalOK, you've got me there. For example I am not 100% sure that the universe wasn't created by some intelligent beings with sufficiently advanced technology to create big bangs (they may of course have evolved naturally in another universe). I don't think it's likely, but that's my emotional prejudices at work. I can't see that I can claim with certainty that it's impossible, and since these being would fit with some definitions of god (creator of the unvierse) then I can't say it is 100% proven that god doesn't exist. Didn't you slip from something or someone beyond our current explanation to god. You speak for atheists, what do you have to say for religionists? Are they just worshiping some unknown possibility. What is the god they believe in - that's the god I don't believe in. I think you have muddled the word god in order make it seem unreasonable to assert definitively that god doesn't exist. But in the process you've made god into something quite different from the god of religion. A mere shadow of the once powerful Yaweh, Baal, Zeus, Thor,... No I was just talking about atheists. If you are going to narrowly define atheism as not believing in the god of the bible, then of course I will agree with you (I will even throw in the Norse and Egyptian gods and a few others, if you like). But that isn't what I am talking about when I say Atheism, and I doubt it's what Asimov meant either. You seem to be equating atheism with asserting that nothing beyond our knowledge of nature exists. Not just failing to believe that such exists, but having 100% confidence that it doesn't. I don't know anyone who calls himself an atheist and who makes such a strong statement. I didn't say that. You can see what I said above. Dawkins has explicity said he is not absolutely certain there is no god of any kind. Vic
Re: Speaking of free speech...
Nothing like a good university stimulate intellectual debate - about who should be prohibited from debating and what should not be mentioned. Brent On 6/29/2014 10:41 PM, LizR wrote: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/06/05/university-college-london-s-nietzsche-club-is-banned.html This is sheer insanity, to quote that bloke from Dad's Army. I can only hope that the Neitzsche Club will not be killed off, but made stronger - and if it /is/ full of rabid ideogogues misrepresenting Friedrich's ideas, let them do it in public so everyone can have a good laugh. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
