From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR
Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 11:37 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: If it's all math, then where does math come from?
On 2 March 2014 20:28, Chris de Morsella
On 2 March 2014 21:05, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote:
I agree that it does not reach the level of an explanation, but am toying
with how it could be a mechanism by which something could seemingly arise
from nothing at all. If - as you point out the laws of physics (or math
On 01 Mar 2014, at 11:53, Chris de Morsella wrote:
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com
] On Behalf Of Bruno Marchal
Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 12:23 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: If it's all math, then where does math
On 01 Mar 2014, at 10:15, LizR wrote:
On 1 March 2014 21:03, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 01 Mar 2014, at 02:06, LizR wrote:
On 1 March 2014 03:22, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 26 Feb 2014, at 03:31, LizR wrote:
Indeed. I have mentioned at times that if you accept
On 01 Mar 2014, at 12:08, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Saturday, March 1, 2014 3:12:49 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Mar 2014, at 02:36, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Friday, February 28, 2014 5:32:48 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote:
If it's all math, then where does math come from?
Strange to
On 01 Mar 2014, at 12:24, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Saturday, March 1, 2014 1:52:12 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 28 Feb 2014, at 03:22, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Thursday, February 27, 2014 8:03:15 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote:
On 28 February 2014 03:02, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com
On 01 Mar 2014, at 13:06, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Friday, February 28, 2014 3:31:25 PM UTC-5, stathisp wrote:
On Friday, February 28, 2014, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thursday, February 27, 2014 7:54:53 PM UTC-5, stathisp wrote:
On 28 February 2014 01:05, Craig
On 02 Mar 2014, at 06:55, Craig Weinberg wrote:
consciousness is deflated to the sum of a set of functions.
That does not happen in the computationalist theory. No 1p things are
ever representable into a 3p thing. There are no 3p description of
[]p p; That simply cannot exist, except,
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR
On 2 March 2014 21:05, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote:
I agree that it does not reach the level of an explanation, but am toying
with how it could be a mechanism by which
On 2 March 2014 16:49, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
You have too simplistic a view of what function means in the context of
an intelligent being.
I think that you have too naive a view of what function means.
That is actually your whole problem: you look at machine, imagine
On 2 March 2014 21:33, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Because 1+1=2 is elementary math, learned in high school.
1+1=2 is a fact is a non trivial philosophical statement, which
involved a non trivial notion like fact. I have seen people discussing ad
nauseam on what is a fact, and
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruno Marchal
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 12:13 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: If it's all math, then where does math come from?
On 01 Mar 2014, at 11:53, Chris de
Kim Jones B. Mus. GDTL
On 1 Mar 2014, at 7:43 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
and I chose numbers as people are familiarized with them.
Bruno
How about music? Music is just a bunch of numbers. We're music. Let's go to the
pub and celebrate.
Kim
--
You received this
On 01 Mar 2014, at 22:30, meekerdb wrote:
On 3/1/2014 12:28 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Mar 2014, at 07:04, meekerdb wrote:
On 2/28/2014 9:22 PM, LizR wrote:
Nevertheless, it does seem to be. That is, 17 is a prime number
regardless of whether anyone knows it is, or even knows what
On 02 Mar 2014, at 08:09, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 1 March 2014 01:40, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
If you start with the assumption that the physics relevant to brain
function is not computable then computationalism is false: it
would be
impossible to make a machine
On 01 Mar 2014, at 21:21, John Mikes wrote:
Bruno concluded his Feb 28 post:
The TOE extracted from comp assumes we agree on the laws of
addition and multiplication, and on classical logic. From this you
can prove the existence of the universal numbers and or all their
computations, and
On 02 Mar 2014, at 10:21, Chris de Morsella wrote:
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com
] On Behalf Of LizR
On 2 March 2014 21:05, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com
wrote:
I agree that it does not reach the level of an explanation, but am
On 02 Mar 2014, at 06:14, meekerdb wrote:
On 3/1/2014 6:43 PM, Chris de Morsella wrote:
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com
] On Behalf Of meekerdb
Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 1:31 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: If it's
On 02 Mar 2014, at 04:54, Russell Standish wrote:
On Sat, Mar 01, 2014 at 01:03:39PM -0800, meekerdb wrote:
On 3/1/2014 12:07 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 28 Feb 2014, at 23:58, meekerdb wrote:
On 2/28/2014 2:32 PM, LizR wrote:
If it's all math, then where does math come from?
Strange to
On 02 Mar 2014, at 10:49, LizR wrote:
On 2 March 2014 21:33, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Because 1+1=2 is elementary math, learned in high school.
1+1=2 is a fact is a non trivial philosophical statement,
which involved a non trivial notion like fact. I have seen people
On 01 Mar 2014, at 14:00, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
Bruno,
This is incorrect. We know truth by its consistency across scope.
Consistency does not entail truth.
The universe is consistent.
That makes no sense. The universe is not a theory, nor a believer, a
priori.
I don't know what you
On 02 Mar 2014, at 01:56, LizR wrote:
I like the frog and bird metaphors, though! At least I prefer the
idea of the bird looking down on the mathematical landscape than
worrying about the eye of god.
I prefer the inner god to be a bird than a frog, but may be that's
personal :
The
On 01 Mar 2014, at 15:45, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Saturday, March 1, 2014 8:00:54 AM UTC-5, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
Bruno,
This is incorrect. We know truth by its consistency across scope.
How do we know consistency though? Isn't the ability to detect and
interpret consistency (through
On 02 Mar 2014, at 10:49, Chris de Morsella wrote:
the null set... the set of nothing at all. The null set is a lot more
than nothing.
Sure. The set { { } } is not empty. { } *is* something.
Yes, with the set theoretical principles of reflexion and
comprehension, you can get almost
On 02 Mar 2014, at 11:13, Kim Jones wrote:
Kim Jones B. Mus. GDTL
On 1 Mar 2014, at 7:43 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
and I chose numbers as people are familiarized with them.
Bruno
How about music? Music is just a bunch of numbers.
Well, you can't say that. Especially
On 01 Mar 2014, at 22:03, meekerdb wrote:
On 3/1/2014 12:07 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 28 Feb 2014, at 23:58, meekerdb wrote:
On 2/28/2014 2:32 PM, LizR wrote:
If it's all math, then where does math come from?
Strange to say, elementary maths just appears to be a fact. That
is, it is
So, why do we get tired, and why is being tired like the way that it is? If
its exhaustion, maybe up a couple of days, why does it stop being about
motivation and becomes that we can't think straight? ass
Why do we need to sleep? Why do we need to REM sleep in what looks to be
precise
On Sunday, March 2, 2014 3:46:07 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Mar 2014, at 12:08, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Saturday, March 1, 2014 3:12:49 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Mar 2014, at 02:36, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Friday, February 28, 2014 5:32:48 PM
Ghibbs, I really do take it seriously, but I have also become aware that (from
a behavioral anthropological view) even climate scientists can get corrupted,
can follow their peers in to group think, just like anyone else. So, I say,
even though its their expertise (indeed!) they may not be
Hmm. Show me how I disinformed? Oh! By disagreeing. Ah! But what are the facts?
What is the behavior of pols and billionaires? Where's the panic over
inundating waters? No crash programs? I guess its easy to be lied to, if one is
bought off by ideology in the first place. The cause and effect
On 02 Mar 2014, at 13:36, ghib...@gmail.com wrote:
So, why do we get tired, and why is being tired like the way that it
is? If its exhaustion, maybe up a couple of days, why does it stop
being about motivation and becomes that we can't think straight? ass
Why do we need to sleep? Why do
On Sunday, March 2, 2014 9:39:45 AM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Mar 2014, at 21:21, John Mikes wrote:
Bruno concluded his Feb 28 post:
*The TOE extracted from comp assumes we agree on the laws of addition
and multiplication, and on classical logic. From this you can prove the
On Sunday, March 2, 2014 3:50:07 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Mar 2014, at 12:24, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Saturday, March 1, 2014 1:52:12 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 28 Feb 2014, at 03:22, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Thursday, February 27, 2014 8:03:15 PM UTC-5, Liz R
Just a hunch, is that we cannot separate consciousness from physics. What this
implies I shall leave for the truly, brainy.
-Original Message-
From: ghibbsa ghib...@gmail.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sun, Mar 2, 2014 7:36 am
Subject: consciousness
On 02 Mar 2014, at 17:10, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sunday, March 2, 2014 3:46:07 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Mar 2014, at 12:08, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Saturday, March 1, 2014 3:12:49 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Mar 2014, at 02:36, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On
On Sunday, March 2, 2014 11:34:33 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
ptruth
Bpbeliefs
Bp pknowledge
Bp p observations
Bp p p sensations
I would invert this of course. We do not know that the universe begins with
'truth'. Truth is a belief about what a sensation
Jesse,
To answer your final question. If I understand your 3 points correctly then
I agree with all 3. Though I suspect we understand them differently. When
you spring your 'proof' we will find that out.
And to your first points. I agree completely that there is no objective or
actual truth
On 2 March 2014 22:18, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be javascript:;
wrote:
On 02 Mar 2014, at 08:09, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 1 March 2014 01:40, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be javascript:;
wrote:
If you start with the assumption that the physics relevant to brain
function is not
Brent, Liz, others,
I sum up the main things, and give a lot of exercises, or meditation
subject.
Liz we can do them one at a time, even one halve. Ask questions if the
question asked seems unclear.
***
A Kripke frame, or multiverse, is a couple (W, R) with W a non empty
set of worlds,
On 02 Mar 2014, at 17:34, ghib...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, March 2, 2014 9:39:45 AM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Mar 2014, at 21:21, John Mikes wrote:
Bruno concluded his Feb 28 post:
The TOE extracted from comp assumes we agree on the laws of
addition and multiplication, and on
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 7:09 PM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote:
Jesse,
To address your points in order:
1. Yes, you said that proper ages are invariant. But note the important
point that the proper age of A to himself is a direct observation (he looks
at his age clock), but to
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 2:50 PM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote:
I wanted to ask 'why the closed mind FOR solar?
I have nothing against solar and I'm in favor of anything that works, but
there is a reason it hasn't taken over by now and its not because of a
sinister secret ruling cabal
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 9:13 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
By the way, here is some scientific evidence, in case you're interested.
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
[image: Inline images 1]
If that chart is supposed to be scary it isn't, it shows a .74 degree
Celsius
On Sunday, March 2, 2014 4:34:33 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 02 Mar 2014, at 13:36, ghi...@gmail.com javascript: wrote:
So, why do we get tired, and why is being tired like the way that it
is? If its exhaustion, maybe up a couple of days, why does it stop
being about
On Sunday, March 2, 2014 11:54:21 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 02 Mar 2014, at 17:10, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sunday, March 2, 2014 3:46:07 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Mar 2014, at 12:08, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Saturday, March 1, 2014 3:12:49 AM
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote:
Jesse,
To answer your final question. If I understand your 3 points correctly
then I agree with all 3. Though I suspect we understand them differently.
When you spring your 'proof' we will find that out.
Thanks for
On 3/1/2014 11:20 PM, Chris de Morsella wrote:
*From:*everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] *On
Behalf Of *meekerdb
*Sent:* Saturday, March 01, 2014 11:14 PM
*To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com
*Subject:* Re: The solar example of a town in Germany
On
Jesse,
I'll address your points in a later post, but first let me run this simple
new case by you.
Imagine the symmetric trips of the twins continually criss cross each other
at 1 second intervals (of their own proper clocks) for the duration of the
entire trip.
At each 1 second meeting I'm
On 3/1/2014 11:37 PM, LizR wrote:
On 2 March 2014 20:28, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com
mailto:cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote:
Yes, except I conceive of a virtuous circle of explanation...and reject
the idea that there is an base.
An interesting view. Recently I have been
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote:
Jesse,
I'll address your points in a later post, but first let me run this simple
new case by you.
Imagine the symmetric trips of the twins continually criss cross each
other at 1 second intervals (of their own proper
On 3/2/2014 8:34 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 02 Mar 2014, at 13:36, ghib...@gmail.com wrote:
So, why do we get tired, and why is being tired like the way that it is? If its
exhaustion, maybe up a couple of days, why does it stop being about motivation and
becomes that we can't think
On Sunday, March 2, 2014 3:54:25 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 3/2/2014 8:34 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 02 Mar 2014, at 13:36, ghi...@gmail.com javascript: wrote:
So, why do we get tired, and why is being tired like the way that it
is? If its
exhaustion, maybe up a couple of
On 3 March 2014 05:33, spudboy...@aol.com wrote:
Hmm. Show me how I disinformed? Oh! By disagreeing. Ah! But what are the
facts? What is the behavior of pols and billionaires? Where's the panic
over inundating waters? No crash programs? I guess its easy to be lied to,
if one is bought off by
On 3 March 2014 05:24, spudboy...@aol.com wrote:
If GW is now upon us, despite weeks and weeks or artic storms here in the
continental US and Canada,
Oh, we had a cold winter so global warming's a myth! Please be serious. I
assume you know enough about climate science to realise that arctic
On 3 March 2014 07:53, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 9:13 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
By the way, here is some scientific evidence, in case you're interested.
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
[image: Inline images 1]
If that chart is
On 3 March 2014 07:53, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
Sometimes you have to set logic aside to come to your senses.
Why do I get a McCoy - Spock vibe here?
Fascinating suggestion, Doctor, but completely illogical.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to
On 3 March 2014 08:33, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
I don't think Tegmark appreciates how much the laws of physics depend on
our demands that the laws be invariant, e.g. conservation of energy is a
consequence of requiring the lagrangian to be time-translation invariant.
That isn't
On 3/2/2014 2:38 PM, LizR wrote:
On 3 March 2014 08:33, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
I don't think Tegmark appreciates how much the laws of physics depend on
our
demands that the laws be invariant, e.g. conservation of energy is a
consequence
On Sunday, March 2, 2014 5:34:50 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote:
On 3 March 2014 07:53, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com javascript:wrote:
Sometimes you have to set logic aside to come to your senses.
Why do I get a McCoy - Spock vibe here?
Fascinating suggestion, Doctor, but completely
On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 01:31:28PM -0500, John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 2:50 PM, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote:
I wanted to ask 'why the closed mind FOR solar?
I have nothing against solar and I'm in favor of anything that works, but
there is a reason it hasn't taken
Jesse,
Glad we agree on the first point but, even if there is some minimum time
limit to the criss crosses, you miss the real point of my example. Let me
restate it:
Since a criss cross symmetric trip is NO DIFFERENT IN PRINCIPLE than our
previous symmetric trip (only a single meeting) it is
Its not just the weather outside, its worldwide, its not matching the models I
have looked at (courtesy IPCC and NASA) and they fall down. Inaccurate. Word
games are played by your side, demonstrating that its been the 2nd hottest year
on record, squeal! But, why not go for clean energy? Do we
On 3 March 2014 11:54, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 3/2/2014 2:38 PM, LizR wrote:
On 3 March 2014 08:33, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
I don't think Tegmark appreciates how much the laws of physics depend
on our demands that the laws be invariant, e.g. conservation of
On 3 March 2014 12:21, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, March 2, 2014 5:34:50 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote:
On 3 March 2014 07:53, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com wrote:
Sometimes you have to set logic aside to come to your senses.
Why do I get a McCoy - Spock vibe here?
Jesse,
Just checking but I'm sure you would agree that twins AT REST with respect
to each other are the same actual age (have a 1:1 proper age correlation)
even if they are SEPARATED by distance? You just don't agree that if they
are separated by distance AND in symmetric acceleration that
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 6:49 PM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote:
Jesse,
Just checking but I'm sure you would agree that twins AT REST with respect
to each other are the same actual age (have a 1:1 proper age correlation)
even if they are SEPARATED by distance? You just don't agree that
Dear Russell,
please allow me to address your contribution after so much of emotionally
impaired and poorly adjusted hoopla
in this discussion. Let me join your considerate way - if I am capable of -
and speak about SOME details only.
I spent a lifetime in environmentally 'infected'
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 6:40 PM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote:
Jesse,
Glad we agree on the first point but, even if there is some minimum time
limit to the criss crosses, you miss the real point of my example. Let me
restate it:
Since a criss cross symmetric trip is NO DIFFERENT IN
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Jesse Mazer laserma...@gmail.com wrote:
No, of course I wouldn't agree that there is any unique actual truth
about their ages in this case, nor would any mainstream physicist.
Sorry, I wrote too quickly here--what I meant is that I don't agree there
is any
On 3/2/2014 3:46 PM, LizR wrote:
On 3 March 2014 11:54, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 3/2/2014 2:38 PM, LizR wrote:
On 3 March 2014 08:33, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
I don't think Tegmark
Jesse,
OK good, that's what I assumed you meant.
BUT now take the two twins at rest standing on opposite sides of the earth,
and then they each start walking in different directions. By your criterion
you then have to say that suddenly and instantly there is NO more 1:1
correlation of their
On Sunday, March 2, 2014 6:47:51 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote:
On 3 March 2014 12:21, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com javascript:wrote:
On Sunday, March 2, 2014 5:34:50 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote:
On 3 March 2014 07:53, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com wrote:
Sometimes you have to set logic
On 3 March 2014 13:39, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 3/2/2014 3:46 PM, LizR wrote:
IMHO it makes perfect sense to expect an unexplained phenomenon to obey
conservation laws, given their success to date. That is, given that
everything in the universe that had been studied over the
Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Agreement comes to mind. It's seen as a silent,
gradual but finalizing invasion of Europe/US sovereignty by large corporate
interests, according to Le Monde as example. Harmonization of for
example environmental and health standards entail the imposition of the
lowest,
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote:
Jesse,
OK good, that's what I assumed you meant.
BUT now take the two twins at rest standing on opposite sides of the
earth, and then they each start walking in different directions. By your
criterion you then have to
Brent,
You claim my p-time theory sounds outrageous but you haven't been able to
meaningfully comment on my many demonstrations of how it actually works
that I've made to Jesse.
For example Jesse claims that there is no 1:1 correlation of proper ages of
twins separated by distance in relative
A little consideration of trains travelling at half lightspeed with photons
bouncing between parallel mirrors, and people observing lights being turned
on in the station should suffice to demonstrate that there is no objective
truth about the order of spatially separated events. This margin is too
On 3 March 2014 11:45, spudboy...@aol.com wrote:
I also just wanted to focus on when the climate whammy will happen, and we
can do about?
That's the $64 trillion question, indeed. I'm happy to focus on that,
rather than speculating about which left- or right-wing conspiracy is
currently
On 3 March 2014 12:42, spudboy...@aol.com wrote:
Its not just the weather outside, its worldwide, its not matching the
models I have looked at (courtesy IPCC and NASA) and they fall down.
Inaccurate. Word games are played by your side, demonstrating that its been
the 2nd hottest year on
On 3 March 2014 13:06, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear Russell,
please allow me to address your contribution after so much of emotionally
impaired and poorly adjusted hoopla
in this discussion. Let me join your considerate way - if I am capable of
- and speak about SOME details
On 3 March 2014 13:51, Platonist Guitar Cowboy multiplecit...@gmail.comwrote:
Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Agreement comes to mind. It's seen as a silent,
gradual but finalizing invasion of Europe/US sovereignty by large corporate
interests, according to Le Monde as example. Harmonization of for
On 3/2/2014 4:50 PM, LizR wrote:
I find Tegmark's metaphysical speculations interesting, because he is at least trying to
get his head around the big questions, like why is there something rather than nothing?
To quote the late Norm Levitt: What is there? Everything! So what isn't there?
Well to the idea about clathrates, is that if we cannot develop solar or
fusion, we'll have to use gas hydrate to survive and burn it, rather than
release it. I do keep informed and we do need to know what is occurring. What
does this say about our arguments?
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Platonist Guitar
Cowboy
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 4:51 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany
Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Agreement comes to
On 3 March 2014 14:58, spudboy...@aol.com wrote:
Well to the idea about clathrates, is that if we cannot develop solar or
fusion, we'll have to use gas hydrate to survive and burn it, rather than
release it. I do keep informed and we do need to know what is occurring.
Yes, mining offshore
On 3 March 2014 15:33, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote:
You are so right about the race to the bottom. The race so good for short
term profit; so foolish for long term preservation. With leadership like
this, one could ask: who needs enemies.
Ain't that the truth. Of course
On 3 March 2014 14:46, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 3/2/2014 4:50 PM, LizR wrote:
I find Tegmark's metaphysical speculations interesting, because he is at
least trying to get his head around the big questions, like why is there
something rather than nothing?
To quote the late
So does reflexive (alpha R alpha) mean that all universes are
*only*accessible to themselves, or does it mean that all universes are
accessible
to themselves and possibly, but not necessarily, to each other?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 7:39 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany
On 3 March 2014 15:33, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com
On 3/2/2014 8:20 PM, Chris de Morsella wrote:
*From:*everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] *On
Behalf Of *LizR
*Sent:* Sunday, March 02, 2014 7:39 PM
*To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com
*Subject:* Re: The solar example of a town in Germany
On 3 March
On 3/2/2014 9:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Brent, Liz, others,
I sum up the main things, and give a lot of exercises, or meditation subject.
Liz we can do them one at a time, even one halve. Ask questions if the question asked
seems unclear.
***
A Kripke frame, or multiverse, is a couple (W,
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 8:26 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany
On 3/2/2014 8:20 PM, Chris de Morsella wrote:
From:
On 03 Mar 2014, at 04:55, LizR wrote:
So does reflexive (alpha R alpha) mean that all universes are only
accessible to themselves, or does it mean that all universes are
accessible to themselves and possibly, but not necessarily, to each
other?
Good question. Mathematician are
On 21 Jan 2014, at 11:14, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
Thanks for the info. It is very interesting and It helps in many
ways.
You are welcome.
The problem with mathematical notation is that it is good to store and
systematize knowledge, not to make it understandable. The transmission
of
On 02 Mar 2014, at 17:42, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sunday, March 2, 2014 3:50:07 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Mar 2014, at 12:24, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Saturday, March 1, 2014 1:52:12 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 28 Feb 2014, at 03:22, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On
On 02 Mar 2014, at 17:45, spudboy...@aol.com wrote:
Just a hunch, is that we cannot separate consciousness from physics.
What do you mean by this? It is more that we can't separate physics
from consciousness.
Are you aware that if we (in the third person view) are machine, then
physics
On 02 Mar 2014, at 18:01, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Truth is a belief about what a sensation represents.
Not at all. By definition, truth is independent of belief. Arithmetic
truth does explain where the belief come from. If not you fall into
solipsism.
Bruno
On 02 Mar 2014, at 18:51, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 2 March 2014 22:18, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 02 Mar 2014, at 08:09, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 1 March 2014 01:40, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
If you start with the assumption that the physics
On 02 Mar 2014, at 19:53, ghib...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, March 2, 2014 4:34:33 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 02 Mar 2014, at 13:36, ghi...@gmail.com wrote:
So, why do we get tired, and why is being tired like the way that it
is? If its exhaustion, maybe up a couple of days, why
On 02 Mar 2014, at 20:33, meekerdb wrote:
On 3/1/2014 11:37 PM, LizR wrote:
On 2 March 2014 20:28, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com
wrote:
Yes, except I conceive of a virtuous circle of explanation...and
reject
the idea that there is an base.
An interesting view. Recently I have
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
