On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:43 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 December 2013 12:13, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
All the transactions that occurred so far are registered in a file
that is shared between the nodes in the network. New transactions are
broadcast to many
Hi Telmo..
Yes.
The question of why spain/portugal lost the first world war against UK is
very interesting, and I have my own conclussions that are deeply linked to
other events, such is the location of the civilizations: why they appear at
the border of land and sea, specially when this border
Here I wrote something about this: Maxism Weberism is outdated:
http://nocorrecto.blogspot.com.es/2012/02/maxism-webberism-is-outdated.html
2013/12/19 Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com
Hi Telmo..
Yes.
The question of why spain/portugal lost the first world war against UK is
very
On 18 Dec 2013, at 18:59, John Clark wrote:
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
You are the one not taking into account the 1p and 3p distinction,
For several years now Bruno Marchal has accused John Clark of that,
but John Clark would maintain
On 18 Dec 2013, at 21:29, LizR wrote:
On 19 December 2013 08:05, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
For someone who demands to be quoted in full, you sure cherry-picked
pieces from Bruno's e-mail. How telling it is that you erased the
following questions:
Bruno: The question is: is
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 4:42 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
It is clear that you don't take the first person experiences into
account
The not a ?? For the third time please say how many first person
experiences exist on planet Earth right now
Locally, 7 billions of
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
Bruno: The question is: is it enough correct so that you would please us
in answering step 4. If not: what is incorrect.
John Clark: (No answer, deleted the question)
I have not read step 4, however if it is built on
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:29 AM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
Bruno: The question is: is it enough correct so that you would please us
in answering step 4. If not: what is incorrect.
John Clark: (No answer,
I do not believe in #1 due to the no cloning theorem.
If comp produces QM it must also produce the no cloning theorem.
Richard
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:29 AM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 18,
Liz - with all y appreciation for your so far experienced stance - you seem
feministic if you believe *(**Wherever women are given equal rights the
birth rate drops dramatically) *assuming a superb mental position by the
child-bearing gender.
Just thik about e.g. Mrs Romney - a woman with
Here is my tuppence about the *hoax-game* of the *fantasy-play*'teleportation':
It is what I said, never substantiated and placed into circumstances never
substantiated or verified even within our imaginary physical(?)
explanations.
Wana play? be my guest.
In a 'transportation' (cf:
A nice exposition, Jesse. But it bothers me that it seems to rely on the idea of output
and a kind of isolation like invoking a meta-level. What if instead of Craig Weinberg
will never in his lifetime assert that this statement is true we considered Craig
Weinberg will never in his lifetime
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:36 PM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote:
Here is my tuppence about the *hoax-game* of the
*fantasy-play*'teleportation':
It is what I said, never substantiated and placed into circumstances never
substantiated or verified even within our imaginary physical(?)
Hi Roger,
No, QM allows teleportation so 1) and 2) are already shown (in the case
of atoms) to be possible. What QM disallows is 3) - 5), which makes the
rest of the steps subject to debate. I wish that Bruno could run his UD
argument without any discussion of teleportation.
As I see things,
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
1. Teleportation is survivable
Yes.
2.Teleportation with a time delay is survivable, and the time delay is
imperceptible to the person teleported
Obviously.
3. Duplication (teleportation to two locations: one
To me it seems like thinking something is true is much more of a fuzzy
category that asserting something is true (even assertions can be
ambiguous when stated in natural language, but they can be made non-fuzzy
by requiring that each assertion be framed in terms of some formal language
and entered
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 3:26 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
1. Teleportation is survivable
Yes.
2.Teleportation with a time delay is survivable, and the time delay is
imperceptible to the person
On 20 December 2013 09:25, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote:
How would you imagine to save the world (I mean: humanity)?
Someone out there discover the psychological root causes of all the bad
stuff we do and design a retrovirus that will fix them. Turn us all into
saints - until we're
On 12/19/2013 1:06 PM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Roger,
No, QM allows teleportation so 1) and 2) are already shown (in the case of atoms) to
be possible. What QM disallows is 3) - 5), which makes the rest of the steps subject to
debate.
The non-cloning theorem disallows 3)-5) at the
On 12/19/2013 1:30 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote:
To me it seems like thinking something is true is much more of a fuzzy category that
asserting something is true
Maybe. But note that Bruno's MGA is couched in terms of a dream, just to avoid any
input/output. That seems like a suspicious move to
On 20 December 2013 11:40, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 12/19/2013 1:30 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote:
To me it seems like thinking something is true is much more of a fuzzy
category that asserting something is true
Maybe. But note that Bruno's MGA is couched in terms of a dream, just
If it's all just math, what is the unexpected surprise that makes it funny?
Is math surprised that its math?
On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 2:07:47 AM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
http://abstrusegoose.com/544
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
The unexpected surprise is the jump up the reductionist food chain in the
last frame.
On 20 December 2013 14:15, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
If it's all just math, what is the unexpected surprise that makes it
funny? Is math surprised that its math?
On Wednesday, December
23 matches
Mail list logo
