Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?
Jason, John, and Bruno, One must distinguish here between consciousness itself (the subject of the Hard Problem), and the contents of consciousness and their structure (the subjects of the Easy Problems). The contents and their structure are most certainly computed by the minds of organisms, but the fact that the results of these computations are conscious is due to the self-manifesting immanent nature of reality as I explained in more detail in a post yesterday Edgar On Dec 22, 2013, at 10:41 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 6:58 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 21 Dec 2013, at 17:09, John Mikes wrote: 'Implicit assumptions'? Jason seems to me as standing on the platform of physical sciences - I let Jason answer, but this is not my feeling. It seems to me that Jason is quite cautious on this, and open to put physics on an arithmetical platform instead. John's initial critique was that I seemed to be assuming a lot that he doe not. I replied to ask what specifically he thinks I am assuming which he was not. To clarify, I was assuming arithmetical truth and the idea that the correct computation can instantiate our consciousness. Jason -- 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/groups/opt_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/groups/opt_out.
Re: Minds, Machines and Gödel
Liz, No, that doesn't make Reality subject to the halting problem. The halting problem is when a computer program is trying to reach some independently postulated result and may or may not be able to reach it. Reality doesn't have any problem like this. It just computes the logical results of the evolution of the current information state of the universe. There are no independently postulated states that aren't directly computed by reality which reality then attempts to reach (prove). Edgar On Dec 21, 2013, at 3:26 PM, LizR wrote: Reality is analogous to a running software program. Godel's Theorem does not apply. A human could speculate as to whether any particular state of Reality could ever arise computationally and it might be impossible to determine that, but again that has nothing to do with the actual operation of Reality,since it is only a particular internal mental model of that reality. Wouldn't that make reality susceptible to the halting problem? ...hello, is anybody there? Why have all the stars gone 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/groups/opt_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/groups/opt_out.
Re: Bruno's mathematical reality
from the actual logico-mathematical structure of reality in important ways (e.g. infinities and infinitesimals which don't actually exist in external reality). I can explain further if anyone is interested, or you can read about it in my book... Edgar Owen -- 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/groups/opt_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/groups/opt_out.
Re: Bruno's mathematical reality
Bruno, Thanks for your comments. However I think you are coming at Reality from the POV of human logico-mathematical theory whose results you are trying to impose on reality. My approach is to closely examine reality and then try to figure out how it works and what ITS innate rules and structures are. I would probably agree with much of what you say, if you were saying it about human logico-mathematical structures, but the logico-mathematical structure of reality is not bound by human rules. It runs according to its own logic and science is the process of trying to figure out what those rules are and how they work... For example, reality is clearly a computational process, and it runs against pure information which is the fundamental stuff of the universe. There is simply no other way current information states of reality could result from previous ones other than by a computational process. How that computational process works must be determined by examining reality itself. We may try to make sense of it in terms of traditional human math theory, but when there are differences then reality always trumps human math theory, which applies to human math rather than reality's logico-mathematical system. Edgar On Dec 22, 2013, at 6:44 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 21 Dec 2013, at 00:52, Edgar Owen wrote: All, The fundamental nature of reality is examined in detail in my recent book on Reality available on Amazon under my name. Marchal is on the right track, but reality consists not just of numbers (math) Arithmetic is not just numbers, but numbers + some laws (addition and multiplication). but is a running logical structure analogous to software When you have the laws (addition and multiplication), it can be shown that a tiny part of arithmetic implement all possible computations (accepting Church thesis). Without Church thesis, you can still prove that that tiny part of arithmetic emulates (simulate exactly) all Turing (or all known) computations. that continually computes the current state of the universe. You mean the physical universe. Have you read my papers or posts? if we are machine, there is no physical reality that we can assume. the whole of physics must be derived from arithmetic. Just as software includes but doesn't consist only of numbers and math, so does reality. It depends on your initial assumption. In fact the equations of physical science make sense only when embedded in a logical structure just as is the case in computational reality. The computational reality is a tiny part of arithmetic. Logic is just a tool to explore such realities. Modern science has a major lacuna, the notion that all of reality is mathematical, Most scientists do not believe this, and indeed criticize my work for seeming to go in that direction. Then term like reality and mathematical are very fuzzy. Now, if we are machine, then it can be shown that for the ontology we need arithmetic, or any equivalent Turing universal system, and we *cannot* assume anything more (that is the key non obvious point). Then, it is shown that the physical reality is: 1) an internal aspect of arithmetic 2) despite this, it is vastly bigger than arithmetic and even that any conceivable mathematics. That is why I insist that the reality we can access to is not mathematical, but theological. It contains many things provably escaping all possible sharable mathematics. That arithmetic is (much) bigger viewed from inside than viewed from outside is astonishing, and is a sort of Skolem paradox (not a contradiction, just a weirdness). that prevents science from grasping the complete nature of reality. In truth all of reality is logical, as is software, and the mathematics is just a subset of the logic. I disagree, with all my respect. Even arithmetic escapes logic. It is logic which is just a branch of math, but math, even just arithmetic, escapes logic. Arithmetical truth escapes all effective theories (theories with checkable proofs). After all, modern science with its misguided insistence that all of reality is mathematical, I really do not believe this. Except for Tegmark and Schmidhuber, I doubt any scientist believes this. But its is a consequence of computationalism, for the ontology. Yet, the physical is purely epistemological, and go beyond mathematics. I show that all universal machine, when believeing in enough induction axioms, can discovered this by introspection only. has had nothing useful to say about the nature of either consciousness or the present moment, the two most fundamental aspects of experience. I suggest you read my sane paper.: http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/publications/SANE2004MARCHALAbstract.html It explains the present moment by using Gödel form of indexical (with explicit fixed points), including the non
Re: Bruno's mathematical reality
Mitch, No, my theory comes not from those gentlemen, but (at least hopefully) from reality itself. As to where reality's 'computer network' exists see my previous reply to Mitch where I explain in a fair amount of detail trying to answer his excellent question... Edgar On Dec 22, 2013, at 2:04 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Your theory comes from Von Neumann, and Chaitin, and Wolfram, does it not, Edgar? That everything is a program or cellular automata, and in the beginning was a program. Following along, what is this Logic comprised of (sort of like SPK's query) is it electrons, is it virtual particles, is it field lines? Where doth the logical structure sleep? In Planck Cells? I apologize if my questions annoy, but where is the computer network that computes the current state of the universe. Can we get MIT physicist Seth Lloyd to shake a stick or a laser pointer, or otherwise, display, where this abacus dwells? Thanks, Mitch -Original Message- From: Stephen Paul King stephe...@charter.net To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sun, Dec 22, 2013 1:36 pm Subject: Re: Bruno's mathematical reality Dear Edger, Where does the fire come from that animates the logic? On Friday, December 20, 2013 6:52:54 PM UTC-5, Edgar L. Owen wrote: All, The fundamental nature of reality is examined in detail in my recent book on Reality available on Amazon under my name. Marchal is on the right track, but reality consists not just of numbers (math) but is a running logical structure analogous to software that continually computes the current state of the universe. Just as software includes but doesn't consist only of numbers and math, so does reality. In fact the equations of physical science make sense only when embedded in a logical structure just as is the case in computational reality. Modern science has a major lacuna, the notion that all of reality is mathematical, that prevents science from grasping the complete nature of reality. In truth all of reality is logical, as is software, and the mathematics is just a subset of the logic. After all, modern science with its misguided insistence that all of reality is mathematical, has had nothing useful to say about the nature of either consciousness or the present moment, the two most fundamental aspects of experience. However I present a computational based information approach to these in my book among many other things. The second clarification that needs to be made to the post on Marchal's work is that human math and logic are distinct from the actual math and logic that computes reality. The human version is a generalized and extended approximation of the actual that differs from the actual logico-mathematical structure of reality in important ways (e.g. infinities and infinitesimals which don't actually exist in external reality). I can explain further if anyone is interested, or you can read about it in my book... Edgar Owen -- 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/groups/opt_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/groups/opt_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/groups/opt_out.
Re: Bruno's mathematical reality
Brent, I don't avoid infinities but Reality does. When one understands what infinities are and how they are defined as an unending and uncompletable process of addition it is quite clear that nothing physical can be infinite. As I've posted in other replies Reality is a computational system like running software. Godel and the implications for the Principia don't apply to the logico-mathematical computational system of reality, they apply only to human logico-mathematical systems. The logico-mathematical system of Reality simply computes one state of the universe from the previous. There are no statements out of the blue that are subject to proof which what Godel, Halting, Russell and Whitehead are all about. It's like trying to apply these to a piece of software, there is no relevance, in this case reality's software Edgar On Dec 21, 2013, at 5:14 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/20/2013 3:52 PM, Edgar Owen wrote: All, The fundamental nature of reality is examined in detail in my recent book on Reality available on Amazon under my name. Marchal is on the right track, but reality consists not just of numbers (math) but is a running logical structure analogous to software that continually computes the current state of the universe. Just as software includes but doesn't consist only of numbers and math, so does reality. In fact the equations of physical science make sense only when embedded in a logical structure just as is the case in computational reality. Modern science has a major lacuna, the notion that all of reality is mathematical, that prevents science from grasping the complete nature of reality. In truth all of reality is logical, as is software, and the mathematics is just a subset of the logic. After the difficulties of Russell and Whitehead, and Godel's incompleteness theorem I thought the idea that mathematics was a subset of logic had been laid to rest. After all, modern science with its misguided insistence that all of reality is mathematical, has had nothing useful to say about the nature of either consciousness or the present moment, the two most fundamental aspects of experience. However I present a computational based information approach to these in my book among many other things. The second clarification that needs to be made to the post on Marchal's work is that human math and logic are distinct from the actual math and logic that computes reality. The human version is a generalized and extended approximation of the actual that differs from the actual logico-mathematical structure of reality in important ways (e.g. infinities and infinitesimals which don't actually exist in external reality). I'm interested in how you avoid infinities. Do you eschew even potential infinities? Brent I can explain further if anyone is interested, or you can read about it in my book... Edgar Owen -- 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/groups/opt_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/groups/opt_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/groups/opt_out.
A simple incontrovertible proof there are two kinds of time
All, The proof is simply the fact that the time traveling twins meet up again with different clock times, but always in the exact same present moment. This proves beyond any doubt there are two kinds of time, clock time which varies by relativistic observer, and the time of the present moment (what I call P-time) which is absolute and common to all observers across the universe. When this is realized there are a number of profound implications. First that time travel outside the common present moment is impossible since all of reality (the entire universe) exists within/is the common present moment. The only time travel that is possible is having different clock times within the same shared present moment. Second, that this is compatible with only one cosmological geometry, named that the universe is a 4-dimensional hypersphere with P-time (not clock time) as its continually extending radial dimension. That is cosmological space is positively curved and finite. In fact we all see all 4-dimensions of this geometry all the time and visually verify this, as the radial P-time dimension is seen as distance in every direction from every point in the 3-dimensional space of the hypersphere's surface. What amazes me is that no one recognized this simple obvious fact prior to my stating it in my 1997 paper 'Spacetime and Consciousness'. It's a great example of how the trivially obvious can remain unrecognized, no matter how important, if it isn't part of the accepted world view of, in this case, either common sense or science. Edgar -- 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/groups/opt_out.
Re: Posting problems
Yes, of course it is set to that. We'll see if this gets posted Edgar On Dec 23, 2013, at 2:12 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: Hi, I'm using gmail and it works flawlessly. Just check when replying that the address is set to everything-list@googlegroups.com (it should normally default to that as the Reply-To header is set to that address). Regards, Quentin 2013/12/23 Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net I've set option of getting all posts as emails which seems to be working OK I think. But when I reply to a post via my Mac mail it never seems to get posted to the group. Also I tried starting several new topics via Mac mail by simply using a new subject line however none of either type of post ever seems to show up on the group website. I sent 8-9 posts via MacMail over 24 hours ago and none have appeared on the group website. Can anyone tell me how to fix this please? It works on Yahoo Groups just fine. Is anyone here using their email to receive and reply to the group OK? Thanks, Edgar -- 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/groups/opt_out. -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy Batty/Rutger Hauer) -- 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/groups/opt_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/groups/opt_out.
Re: Bruno's mathematical reality
Stephen, A very important point which I cover extensively in my book, but rather subtle to grasp. Reality clearly exists. There is something really here now and actual and happening. The totality of that is defined as reality and I refer to its 'stuff' (non-physical but real and actual) as an entity I call 'ontological energy'. It is somewhat similar to the ancient concept of Tao. This ontological energy is originally formless, similar to a generalized quantum vacuum, and contains the possibilities of all information forms which can arise within it. Similar to a formless sea of water whose nature determines what forms of waves, currents and ripples which can arise within it. The universe, at its fundamental level, is all the information forms that are actualized within ontological energy, beginning with the big bang, and which continue to evolve according to the laws of nature (the logico-mathematics of reality which we have been discussing). Thus the complete picture of reality consists of the original formless sea (logical space) of ontological energy and all the evolving forms which exist within it. These forms, everything in the universe, are pure information only and have no self-substances other than the ontological energy in which they arise. Just as the self-substances of all wave forms in water is only water. Now to answer your question, it is the fact that the information forms are forms that exist in the sea of reality (the ontological energy) that makes them real and actual, and the fact that happening is one of the fundamental aspects of ontological energy that gives them the fire of life as they continually computationally evolve to manifest the real actual universe. This is why the information structures of reality are real and actual but those of computer software simulating something is not, because they run in reality rather than some silicon computer The universe can/must be considered a living entity in the sense that it is self-animated from within. There is no external force that moves it and there could not be since by definition it includes everything. Therefore the universe is a living entity, and our life and the life of all things comes from the fact that we are information forms, programs, that run within reality. This is the source of the 'fire' that animates the information Edgar On Dec 22, 2013, at 1:36 PM, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Edger, Where does the fire come from that animates the logic? On Friday, December 20, 2013 6:52:54 PM UTC-5, Edgar L. Owen wrote: All, The fundamental nature of reality is examined in detail in my recent book on Reality available on Amazon under my name. Marchal is on the right track, but reality consists not just of numbers (math) but is a running logical structure analogous to software that continually computes the current state of the universe. Just as software includes but doesn't consist only of numbers and math, so does reality. In fact the equations of physical science make sense only when embedded in a logical structure just as is the case in computational reality. Modern science has a major lacuna, the notion that all of reality is mathematical, that prevents science from grasping the complete nature of reality. In truth all of reality is logical, as is software, and the mathematics is just a subset of the logic. After all, modern science with its misguided insistence that all of reality is mathematical, has had nothing useful to say about the nature of either consciousness or the present moment, the two most fundamental aspects of experience. However I present a computational based information approach to these in my book among many other things. The second clarification that needs to be made to the post on Marchal's work is that human math and logic are distinct from the actual math and logic that computes reality. The human version is a generalized and extended approximation of the actual that differs from the actual logico-mathematical structure of reality in important ways (e.g. infinities and infinitesimals which don't actually exist in external reality). I can explain further if anyone is interested, or you can read about it in my book... Edgar Owen -- 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/groups/opt_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
Bruno's mathematical reality
All, The fundamental nature of reality is examined in detail in my recent book on Reality available on Amazon under my name. Marchal is on the right track, but reality consists not just of numbers (math) but is a running logical structure analogous to software that continually computes the current state of the universe. Just as software includes but doesn't consist only of numbers and math, so does reality. In fact the equations of physical science make sense only when embedded in a logical structure just as is the case in computational reality. Modern science has a major lacuna, the notion that all of reality is mathematical, that prevents science from grasping the complete nature of reality. In truth all of reality is logical, as is software, and the mathematics is just a subset of the logic. After all, modern science with its misguided insistence that all of reality is mathematical, has had nothing useful to say about the nature of either consciousness or the present moment, the two most fundamental aspects of experience. However I present a computational based information approach to these in my book among many other things. The second clarification that needs to be made to the post on Marchal's work is that human math and logic are distinct from the actual math and logic that computes reality. The human version is a generalized and extended approximation of the actual that differs from the actual logico-mathematical structure of reality in important ways (e.g. infinities and infinitesimals which don't actually exist in external reality). I can explain further if anyone is interested, or you can read about it in my book... Edgar Owen -- 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/groups/opt_out.
Newbie
Hi, I just joined the group and have a few questions since it's the first Google Group I'm on. First I assume the group must be moderated since it seems to take quite a while for my posts to show up. Is this so and who is/are the moderator(s). Second I thought I set my settings to get all posts as emails on my MacMail so I can reply there which is best for me. But I see a lot of posts on the group website I don't seem to be getting in my MacMail. Can anyone tell me if there is some delay or how to set that correctly? Thanks, Edgar -- 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/groups/opt_out.
Re: Bruno's mathematical reality
Hi John, First thanks for the complement on my post! To address your points. Of course we do have some knowledge of reality. We have to have to be able to function within it which we most certainly do to varying degrees of competence. That is proof we do have sufficient knowledge of reality to function within it. Yes, computations include logic as well as math. Best, Edgar On Friday, December 20, 2013 6:52:54 PM UTC-5, Edgar Owen wrote: All, The fundamental nature of reality is examined in detail in my recent book on Reality available on Amazon under my name. Marchal is on the right track, but reality consists not just of numbers (math) but is a running logical structure analogous to software that continually computes the current state of the universe. Just as software includes but doesn't consist only of numbers and math, so does reality. In fact the equations of physical science make sense only when embedded in a logical structure just as is the case in computational reality. Modern science has a major lacuna, the notion that all of reality is mathematical, that prevents science from grasping the complete nature of reality. In truth all of reality is logical, as is software, and the mathematics is just a subset of the logic. After all, modern science with its misguided insistence that all of reality is mathematical, has had nothing useful to say about the nature of either consciousness or the present moment, the two most fundamental aspects of experience. However I present a computational based information approach to these in my book among many other things. The second clarification that needs to be made to the post on Marchal's work is that human math and logic are distinct from the actual math and logic that computes reality. The human version is a generalized and extended approximation of the actual that differs from the actual logico-mathematical structure of reality in important ways (e.g. infinities and infinitesimals which don't actually exist in external reality). I can explain further if anyone is interested, or you can read about it in my book... Edgar Owen -- 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/groups/opt_out.
