Re: Reversing time = local reversal of thermodynamic arrows?

On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 10:53:28PM -0500, John Clark wrote: > On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 3:56 PM, meekerdb wrote: > > > I'd say that expansion of the universe is almost necessary, not > > contingent. > > > > I'd say that by about 1850 when people started to have a understanding of > what Entropy wa

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 11:25:47AM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 16 Nov 2014, at 22:44, Russell Standish wrote: > > >On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 12:42:51PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> > >>On 14 Nov 2014, at 23:18, Russell Standish wrote: > >> > >>> > >>>I also like to point out that unitari

Re: Reversing time = local reversal of thermodynamic arrows?

Thinking more about this it occurred to me that the source of confusion in all of this might be that we have not clarified the notion of "maximum possible entropy". The unspoken assumption seems to be that the quark-gluon plasma at thermal equilibrium is in a state of maximum entropy and, as th

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

On 18 November 2014 00:44, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 17 Nov 2014, at 07:21, meekerdb wrote: > > On 11/16/2014 7:15 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: >> >>> meekerdb wrote: >>> On 11/16/2014 10:51 AM, LizR wrote: > On 17 November 2014 00:31, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be>> wrot

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

On 11/17/2014 2:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: The bible explains better (if we assume it is correct) And if it isn't correct it doesn't explain anything. Which is why science seeks to test correctness prior to explanatory power. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed t

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

On 11/17/2014 2:39 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 17 Nov 2014, at 04:44, meekerdb wrote: On 11/16/2014 1:49 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 02:13:51PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 14 Nov 2014, at 23:35, Richard Ruquist wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Russell Stan

Re: Edge: Myth of A.I.

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Telmo Menezes > wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Alberto G. Corona >> wrote: >> >>> As Nicolás Gómez Dávila said (more or less): The modern man indulge >>> itself thinking that he is

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

Here is a new blog piece I wrote: http://critique-of-pure-interest.blogspot.nl/2014/11/the-inconsistency-of-nothing-objective_17.html Here I use some of the tools of analytical philosophy to analyze the logical impossibility of nothinness... For the philosophically inclined among you... Peter

Re: Edge: Myth of A.I.

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Alberto G. Corona > wrote: > >> As Nicolás Gómez Dávila said (more or less): The modern man indulge >> itself thinking that he is a mechanism, but protest loudly when he is >> treated as such. >> > > I w

Re: Edge: Myth of A.I.

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: > As Nicolás Gómez Dávila said (more or less): The modern man indulge > itself thinking that he is a mechanism, but protest loudly when he is > treated as such. > I would argue that Gödel provides some excuse for this apparently paradoxic

Re: Edge: Myth of A.I.

As Nicolás Gómez Dávila said (more or less): The modern man indulge itself thinking that he is a mechanism, but protest loudly when he is treated as such. 2014-11-15 18:39 GMT+01:00, zibb...@gmail.com : > I know this comes up a lot, so there's a risk this guy isn't saying > anything new here, but

Re: Can we test for parallel worlds?

Remember the 90's US scifi series, called Sliders? Like that. Otherwise, we're dealing with conjecture. Or the teapot circling Jupiter, which we can do today, if we spent the money. Maybe Fermi's Great Silence is because its easier to trade with different versions of one's homeworld, then put th

Re: Reversing time = local reversal of thermodynamic arrows?

Russell Standish wrote: On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 12:59:28PM +1100, Bruce Kellett wrote: I agree that the past hypothesis, while it explains the thermodynamic AoT, itself stands in need of explanation. This is the great unsolved problem of cosmology -- at least according to many cosmologists. The

Re: Universal Inflation

On 16 Nov 2014, at 23:06, Kim Jones wrote: On 17 Nov 2014, at 4:53 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 16 Nov 2014, at 03:31, Kim Jones wrote: I wonder if by now it's worth considering in information-theoretic terms how the evolution of "academe" tends to result in universes in which most and

Re: Can we test for parallel worlds?

On 16 Nov 2014, at 22:54, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: If we can't interact with world 2, then its as if it doesn't exist. Then it would not interfere. It is the whole point of the quantum: the different terms of the waves can interfere, so we can't make them disappear, even if w

Re: Can we test for parallel worlds?

On 16 Nov 2014, at 20:32, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List wrote: Interesting speculative physics… that makes claims that parallel worlds may be testable. “A new theory, proposed by Howard Wiseman, Director of the Centre of Quantum Dynamics at Griffith University, is different. No n

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

On 17 Nov 2014, at 07:21, meekerdb wrote: On 11/16/2014 7:15 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: meekerdb wrote: On 11/16/2014 10:51 AM, LizR wrote: On 17 November 2014 00:31, Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be >> wrote: Heisenberg was influenced by the positivism of the time (The Vienna

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

On 16 Nov 2014, at 18:46, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 6:31 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > Latitudes and longitudes do not interfere. Maybe Schrodinger's Wave Equation doesn't interfere either, only other worlds do, ? and maybe the wave equation is just a way, and certainly

Re: MGA redux (again!)

On 25 Aug 2014, at 05:56, meekerdb wrote: On 8/24/2014 6:21 PM, LizR wrote: On 25 August 2014 08:43, meekerdb wrote: That's because Bruno rejects the link between 1) and 2) and takes computation to exist in Platonia, independent of physics. So of course with that assumption physics need

Re: MGA redux (again!)

Sorry for commenting this late. On 25 Aug 2014, at 03:21, LizR wrote: On 25 August 2014 08:43, meekerdb wrote: That's because Bruno rejects the link between 1) and 2) and takes computation to exist in Platonia, independent of physics. So of course with that assumption physics needs to e

Re: Edge: Myth of A.I.

On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 8:26 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 11/16/2014 2:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 16 Nov 2014, at 08:45, LizR wrote: > > On 16 November 2014 07:42, John Clark wrote: > >> On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 12:39 PM, wrote: >> >> > The idea that computers are people has a long and

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

On 17 Nov 2014, at 01:07, LizR wrote: Isn't that the sort of thing religious people often say? They try to use their language applied to science. "You believe in evolution, I believe in the Bible. What's the difference?" The bible explains better (if we assume it is correct) consciousnes

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

On 16 Nov 2014, at 23:54, John Mikes wrote: Dear Russell, I try to be polite and smooth in my communications not only with you. Here a question emerges in my mind: how diffrent is your perception of the MV (and the arising of such VERY human connotations) from the concept of 'GOD" in rel

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

On 17 Nov 2014, at 04:44, meekerdb wrote: On 11/16/2014 1:49 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 02:13:51PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 14 Nov 2014, at 23:35, Richard Ruquist wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 05:14:2

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

On 16 Nov 2014, at 22:49, Russell Standish wrote: On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 02:13:51PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 14 Nov 2014, at 23:35, Richard Ruquist wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 05:14:24PM -0500, Richard Ruquist wrote: Bu

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

On 16 Nov 2014, at 22:44, Russell Standish wrote: On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 12:42:51PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 14 Nov 2014, at 23:18, Russell Standish wrote: I also like to point out that unitarity is also equivalent to conservation of information, or in other words "if something can

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

On 16 Nov 2014, at 15:12, zibb...@gmail.com wrote: On Sunday, November 16, 2014 11:08:04 AM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 16 Nov 2014, at 05:06, zib...@gmail.com wrote: On Sunday, November 16, 2014 2:48:33 AM UTC, zib...@gmail.com wrote: On Saturday, November 15, 2014 10:55:45 PM UTC, R

Re: Reversing time = local reversal of thermodynamic arrows?

On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 12:59:28PM +1100, Bruce Kellett wrote: > LizR wrote: > >On 7 November 2014 12:32, Bruce Kellett >> wrote: > > > >I have not seen your arguments for this, being new to the list, but > >the expansion of the universe is a universal con