Re: Thorium: the wonder fuel that wasn't

2014-05-20 8:28 GMT+02:00 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com>: > What about the waste tails he alludes to. I had not known that they had > actually constructed and tested U233 bombs – had always thought it was a > hypothetical problem rather than an actual a

RE: Thorium: the wonder fuel that wasn't

What about the waste tails he alludes to. I had not known that they had actually constructed and tested U233 bombs - had always thought it was a hypothetical problem rather than an actual and supposedly - according to this article - a tested device. His point also that U233 does not need an implosi

Re: The Evolutionary Tree of Religion

On 5/19/2014 9:40 PM, LizR wrote: On 20 May 2014 16:12, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 5/19/2014 7:13 PM, LizR wrote: On 19 May 2014 13:13, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 5/18/2014 5:40 PM, LizR wrote: On 17 May 2014 10:06, John

Re: Thorium: the wonder fuel that wasn't

On 5/19/2014 9:30 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List wrote: At the risk of re-starting the Thorium wars this is a current article on the why NOTS of Thorium. It addresses them point by point. http://thebulletin.org/thorium-wonder-fuel-wasnt7156 A mishmash of criticism most of whi

Re: The Evolutionary Tree of Religion

On 20 May 2014 16:12, meekerdb wrote: > On 5/19/2014 7:13 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 19 May 2014 13:13, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 5/18/2014 5:40 PM, LizR wrote: >> >> On 17 May 2014 10:06, John Mikes wrote: >> >>> Dear Liz, thanks for your care to reflect upon my text and I apologize >>> for my L

RE: Thorium: the wonder fuel that wasn't

At the risk of re-starting the Thorium wars this is a current article on the why NOTS of Thorium. It addresses them point by point. http://thebulletin.org/thorium-wonder-fuel-wasnt7156 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On 20 May 2014 15:13, wrote: > > That's a case of a good problem cut in two, one side murdered and buried > and forgotten, the other side pulped, mixed up with a pot of tea, some > facial moisturizer and a pack of tasty after eight mints, and generously > shared around the room all over, and insi

Re: The Evolutionary Tree of Religion

On 5/19/2014 7:13 PM, LizR wrote: On 19 May 2014 13:13, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 5/18/2014 5:40 PM, LizR wrote: On 17 May 2014 10:06, John Mikes mailto:jami...@gmail.com>> wrote: Dear Liz, thanks for your care to reflect upon my text and I apologize for

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 12:35:47 AM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote: > > > > > On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:40 PM, > wrote: > > > On Monday, May 19, 2014 6:24:45 PM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote: > > > > > On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb wrote: > > On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote: > > His ma

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 01:12:20PM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: > Accordingto Deutsch, MWI is falsifiable, with some actions of a quantum > computer. These would be the heavy hitters of QC, and not the lab toys we > have today, but we'd potentially have access to electrons in para

Re: The Evolutionary Tree of Religion

On 19 May 2014 13:13, meekerdb wrote: > On 5/18/2014 5:40 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 17 May 2014 10:06, John Mikes wrote: > >> Dear Liz, thanks for your care to reflect upon my text and I apologize >> for my LATE REPLY. >> You ask about my opinion on Tegmark's "math-realism" - well, if it were >>

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On 20 May 2014 12:51, meekerdb wrote: > On 5/19/2014 5:27 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 20 May 2014 06:09, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 5/19/2014 10:24 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >> >> >> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote: >>> >>> His main interest

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On 5/19/2014 5:27 PM, LizR wrote: On 20 May 2014 06:09, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 5/19/2014 10:24 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote: His

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On 20 May 2014 06:47, wrote: > > Another major logical problem with this, I mentioned a while back in an > earlier thread. The whole position that matter is non-primary or non-real > or whatever, is effectively trivial and redundant UNLESS and UNTIL that > hypotheses produces major scientific dev

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On 20 May 2014 06:09, meekerdb wrote: > On 5/19/2014 10:24 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > > On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote: >> >> His main interest is the mind-body problem; and my interest in that >>> problem is more from an engineering v

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On 20 May 2014 05:06, meekerdb wrote: > On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote: > > His main interest is the mind-body problem; and my interest in that >> problem is more from an engineering viewpoint. What does it take to make a >> conscious machine and what are the advantages or disadvantages of d

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On 5/19/2014 4:56 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 9:33 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 5/19/2014 11:31 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:09 PM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 5/19/2014 10:24 AM, Te

Re: Moneybot Singularity

On Monday, May 19, 2014 5:52:35 PM UTC-4, Jason wrote: > > Craig, > > What about computer/automated trading software that currently executes the > majority of stock trades in the world? See: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-frequency_trading > > Then there are also those text messaging ser

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 9:33 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 5/19/2014 11:31 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > > > > On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:09 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 5/19/2014 10:24 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >> >> >> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, Li

Re: TRONNIES

On 20 May 2014 11:17, John Ross wrote: > I don’t smoke, but I did not expect a cigar anyway. > > > > I *believe* Chapter I is a fair assessment of current scientific > thinking. (If I honestly believe something but am not certain of, I > *believe* use of the phrase “I believe “ is appropriate.)

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:40 PM, wrote: > > On Monday, May 19, 2014 6:24:45 PM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >> On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote: >> >> His main interest is the mind-body problem; and my interest in that >> problem

RE: TRONNIES

I don’t smoke, but I did not expect a cigar anyway. I believe Chapter I is a fair assessment of current scientific thinking. (If I honestly believe something but am not certain of, I believe use of the phrase “I believe “ is appropriate.) Many scientist are skeptical of many features of the

Re: TRONNIES

John R, I looked briefly at chapter 2 last night and it appears to merely restate your ideas, rather than giving any background reasoning. If so - I haven't finished it yet - that leaves us in the position that you have given a word-based description of a theory which is vastly at odds with existi

Re: Moneybot Singularity

Craig, What about computer/automated trading software that currently executes the majority of stock trades in the world? See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-frequency_trading Then there are also those text messaging services where people pay $1 or more per text message to chat with what they

Re: The end to end structure associated wit Falsification

On Monday, May 19, 2014 8:09:15 PM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 19 May 2014, at 16:46, ghi...@gmail.com wrote: > > > On Monday, May 19, 2014 8:31:53 AM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 19 May 2014, at 01:10, ghi...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> I'm going to bullet point the key, hard-to-v

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On 5/19/2014 11:31 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:09 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 5/19/2014 10:24 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On Monday, May 19, 2014 8:15:32 PM UTC+1, ghi...@gmail.com wrote: > > > On Monday, May 19, 2014 7:47:05 PM UTC+1, ghi...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> >> On Monday, May 19, 2014 7:40:35 PM UTC+1, ghi...@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Monday, May 19, 2014 6:24:45 PM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote:

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On Monday, May 19, 2014 7:47:05 PM UTC+1, ghi...@gmail.com wrote: > > > On Monday, May 19, 2014 7:40:35 PM UTC+1, ghi...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> >> On Monday, May 19, 2014 6:24:45 PM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb wrote: >>> >>> On 5/19/2

Re: The end to end structure associated wit Falsification

On 19 May 2014, at 16:46, ghib...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday, May 19, 2014 8:31:53 AM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 19 May 2014, at 01:10, ghi...@gmail.com wrote: I'm going to bullet point the key, hard-to-vary, components that may or may not result in falsification. In doing so, I will b

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On Monday, May 19, 2014 7:40:35 PM UTC+1, ghi...@gmail.com wrote: > > > On Monday, May 19, 2014 6:24:45 PM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >> On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote: >> >> His main interest is the mind-body problem; and

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On Monday, May 19, 2014 6:24:45 PM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote: > > > > > On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb > > wrote: > > On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote: > > His main interest is the mind-body problem; and my interest in that > problem is more from an engineering viewpoint. What d

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:09 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 5/19/2014 10:24 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > > On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote: >> >> His main interest is the mind-body problem; and my interest in that >>> problem is more from an en

Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On Monday, May 19, 2014 7:26:40 AM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 18 May 2014, at 21:16, ghi...@gmail.com wrote: > > Does this computer architecture assume not-comp? > > > No. Elementary arithmetic emulates n-synchronized oscillators for all n, > even infinite enumerable set of oscillator

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On 5/19/2014 10:24 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote: His main interest is the mind-body problem; and my interest in that problem is more from an engineering viewpoint

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On 19 May 2014, at 11:40, LizR wrote: On 19 May 2014 20:06, Bruno Marchal wrote: (*) You find him cute, you said, but you should see me with my new glasses ;) Are you anything like Michael Caine in "The Ipcress File" ? Only when reading mail. But now I have progressive glasses which I

Fwd: An unusual race

Maybe Bruno would like to train an entry. Brent Original Message http://www.nature.com/news/the-game-is-on-1.15167 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails f

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On 19 May 2014, at 11:38, LizR wrote: On 19 May 2014 15:11, meekerdb wrote: On 5/18/2014 6:26 PM, LizR wrote: On 19 May 2014 05:12, spudboy100 via Everything List > wrote: So you do not have a testable, falsifiable, theory Bruno. Not in the scientific sense. No one calls you on this.h

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote: > > His main interest is the mind-body problem; and my interest in that >> problem is more from an engineering viewpoint. What does it take to make a >> conscious machine and what are the advantages or disadva

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On Monday, May 19, 2014 2:59:52 AM UTC+1, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > > > > > On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 12:15 AM, > wrote: > >> >> On Sunday, May 18, 2014 10:55:03 PM UTC+1, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 7:22 PM, wrote: >>> On Sunday, May 1

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote: His main interest is the mind-body problem; and my interest in that problem is more from an engineering viewpoint. What does it take to make a conscious machine and what are the advantages or disadvantages of doing so. Bruno says a machine that

RE: TRONNIES

My theory describes the internal structure of electrons, photons, protons, atomic nuclei, magnetism, gravity, what preceded the Big Bang, universe contraction, inflation and anti-gravity. In the (you would say very unlikely) event that it turns out that I am correct and existing theories are w

Re: TRONNIES

On Sun, May 18, 2014 John Ross wrote: > I plan to save your e-mails and maybe I will read some of them to the > audience if and when it turns out that I am correct and am awarded the > Nobel prize in Physics. > Wow what a honor, my humble words read out to the entire Swedish Academy! > I beli

RE: TRONNIES

Well said!!! John R From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Telmo Menezes Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 3:44 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: TRONNIES On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 9:27 PM, John Ross wrote: John C

Re: The end to end structure associated wit Falsification

On Monday, May 19, 2014 8:31:53 AM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 19 May 2014, at 01:10, ghi...@gmail.com wrote: > > I'm going to bullet point the key, hard-to-vary, components that may or > may not result in falsification. In doing so, I will be stating not my > personal preference, but

Re: So, a new kind of non-boolean, non-digital, computer architecture

On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 3:05 AM, LizR wrote: > On 19 May 2014 07:16, wrote: > >> Does this computer architecture assume not-comp? >> > > I don't know, but I would think not, because comp allows reality to be > digitised at any level (e.g. sub atomic) which wouldn't contradict the use > of oscill

Re: TRONNIES

On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 9:27 PM, John Ross wrote: > John Clark > > > > I plan to save your e-mails and maybe I will read some of them to the > audience if and when it turns out that I am correct and am awarded the > Nobel prize in Physics. > Glory for the winner, humiliation for the loser! This

Re: TRONNIES

I now have a copy of "Tronnies" - I fear I may be taking exception even to chapter one, which purports to give an overview of contemporary physics but contains many statements that begin "Scientists do not understand how..." many of which refer to things that scientists do, in fact, understand (or

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On 19 May 2014 20:06, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > (*) You find him cute, you said, but you should see me with my new glasses > ;) > > Are you anything like Michael Caine in "The Ipcress File" ? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. T

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On 19 May 2014 15:11, meekerdb wrote: > On 5/18/2014 6:26 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 19 May 2014 05:12, spudboy100 via Everything List < > everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > >> >> >>> So you do not have a testable, falsifiable, theory Bruno. Not in the >>> scientific sense. No one calls y

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On 19 May 2014, at 05:11, meekerdb wrote: On 5/18/2014 6:26 PM, LizR wrote: On 19 May 2014 05:12, spudboy100 via Everything List > wrote: So you do not have a testable, falsifiable, theory Bruno. Not in the scientific sense. No one calls you on this.here.

Re: Is Consciousness Computable?

On 19 May 2014, at 03:26, LizR wrote: On 19 May 2014 05:12, spudboy100 via Everything List > wrote: So you do not have a testable, falsifiable, theory Bruno. Not in the scientific sense. No one calls you on this.here.but then again.let's face it no one answered my question eit

Re: TRONNIES

On 19 May 2014, at 03:05, Russell Standish wrote: On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 10:02:25AM +1200, LizR wrote: I don't know the maths, but I think I understand the principle. General relativity predicts that space in the vicinity of massive bodies is curved, or non-Euclidean, like the surface o

Re: The end to end structure associated wit Falsification

On 19 May 2014, at 01:10, ghib...@gmail.com wrote: I'm going to bullet point the key, hard-to-vary, components that may or may not result in falsification. In doing so, I will be stating not my personal preference, but the long standing convention. In light of this faithfulness simply to w