Hello everyone,
I don't post here very often, but I read your posts every day via nabble
(it is just easier to load responses on the mobile device).
I also don't usually have much to contribute, but I'd like to contribute
something today.
After reviewing and re-reviewing all of the stuff
/2014 2:41 PM, LizR wrote:
On 16 May 2014 17:14, meekerdb meek...@verizon.net javascript: wrote:
On 5/15/2014 10:04 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
So do you think there is some merit in Kauffman's conclusions? Do you
think it is possible to reason about the Void? Or meaningful? Or useful
A fun little article I came across that I thought everyone here might
appreciate:
http://www.imprint.co.uk/CHK/vol7/kauffman_7-4.pdf
Thoughts? Objections?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To unsubscribe from this group and
I don't get it. Please explain?
Are you making a joke, something on the order of both of these guys are
spouting such metaphysical hogwash that the debate between them would be an
even bigger yawnfest than their articles in particular? Or is it some
specific aspect of what each of them
Taoistic chestnut that the Void, when named, is not the Void. And yet,
formal reasoning seems to lead us to some kind of meaningful conclusions
about it regardless.
On Friday, May 16, 2014 12:53:38 AM UTC-4, Brent wrote:
On 5/15/2014 9:30 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
I don't get it. Please
I've been following this thread with some interest, waiting for one movie
to be invariably mentioned among this crowd, and surprised that it hasn't
been yet: Waking Life by Richard Linklater.
Not only would members of this list like this movie, they would also be
reminded of the different
Hey everyone,
I'm starting a new topic here so as not to derail any conversations on
other threads -- the original thread I am commenting on seems to have some
interesting stuff about computer simulations etc. and I don't want to
bother others about it.
Edgar has repeatedly posted links to
life apart from this group!)
So your claim that Edgar REPEATEDLY posted links to both his business and
personal website is simply FALSE. I posted only one link period.
Edgar
On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 1:20:29 PM UTC-5, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
Hey everyone,
I'm starting a new topic
Wow, Liz, very sorry to hear about your friend. If you don't mind me asking
(and if you do mind, simply ignore my question), if you magically just knew
that the universe was in fact a large computation engine where all
possibilities are eventually played out, and also entailing some form of
On what authority do you make such claims?
On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 2:14:54 PM UTC-5, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
Liz, (and Dan)
When people die they vanish from existence. To believe otherwise may be
comforting, but it's just superstition..
There must be a living human body to produce a
feedback on this question, as I think
self-delusion and self-deception are germane to any discussion of
Everything theories, and this is also why it is the domain of so many
cranks.
On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 2:32:28 PM UTC-5, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2014/1/15 freqflyer07281972 thismind
Hey Craig!
I watched the video... very cool!
Questions:
1) Who is the user of the interface? What is us?
2) What is the interface representing? Hoffman uses the analogy of the file
and the trash bin icons on the desktop. In a computer, I know that the file
ultimately represents binary values
I have a funny comic I think all of you will appreciate to one extent or
another. I'm also curious as to your reaction regarding the status of
questions versus answers:
http://comicsthatsaysomething.quora.com/A-Day-at-the-Park
On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 4:19:39 PM UTC-5, Terren Suydam
What on god's green earth are you talking about, man?
Jeez, ya hold out an olive branch, and ya just get more of the same. Sheesh.
Edgar, you are now officially on my pay no mind list...
On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 5:39:43 PM UTC-5, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
Liz,
Wow, do we have some really
Alberto,
Thanks for your thoughts on this issue. They make a lot of sense and I
agree for the most part.
For example, the adolescent sense of superiority that comes with thinking
you've got it all figured out is something that I myself have experienced
(at times in my life when I thought I
Unless I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together, of
course.
Well, that's just it, isn't it? :-) Or indeed, if all of this self stuff
is really a very sophisticated mental model we run...
I've tried making that claim here before, but the response if I recall was
a
On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 4:54:09 PM UTC-5, cdemorsella wrote:
Man that’s uncool. You may think he is an idiot, but to go troll the
internet and then publish on this list his very personal life is crossing a
line. I think you owe the man an apology and need to look into your own
Thank you for posting that link... I really enjoyed reading your blog post!
It captured well many of the thoughts I have had about the whole shebang.
And sorry to hear that your hero died... I've never heard of John Galbraith
Graham before, but learning about him has inspired me to try to do a
I totally agree with you that science, when you really start getting into
the implications of things like QM (and relativity for that matter),
provides some rather unsettling (and yet very exciting!) conclusions. And
yet... they always rest on the tip of uncertainty. Either that, or else the
On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 8:24:31 PM UTC-5, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
Jason,
There are no 'synthetic neurons' that could replace biological ones one
by one. When there are let me know and I'll check them out and answer
your question.
You are letting your imagination run wild here
a few links referencing that being possible please
:-)
Edgar
On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 8:51:13 PM UTC-5, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 8:24:31 PM UTC-5, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
Jason,
There are no 'synthetic neurons' that could replace biological ones one
Also, I am really starting to understand why you have difficulty with
finding a life partner.
On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 9:02:30 PM UTC-5, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
OK.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/adfm.201200640/abstract
On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 8:56:09 PM UTC-5
a life partner, a truly wonderful one.
You?
Edgar
On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 9:03:55 PM UTC-5, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
Also, I am really starting to understand why you have difficulty with
finding a life partner.
On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 9:02:30 PM UTC-5, freqflyer07281972 wrote
P.S. for Liz: TAKE NOTE! While you might be out of the running to be
Edgar's companion, perhaps you might know some non-feminist women who
could be?
On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 9:26:02 PM UTC-5, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
*SEEKING A COMPATIBLE WOMAN OR LONG TERM COMPANION:* I'm seeking
for entertainment. Perhaps you should try watching the
Matrix one more time with popcorn or try contributing something meaningful
to the discussion?
:-)
Edgar
On Monday, January 13, 2014 5:44:47 PM UTC-5, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
Haha! Ya Liz, I think your point is very well taken.
On my part, I am
Might I respectfully suggest the following:
1) That when you have an obvious intuition or brilliant stroke of insight
that goes against a century or more of insight from the most distinguished
physicists and
2) That when you are unable to operationalize your intuition in such a way
that other
In order for criticism to be effective, the one being criticized must be
willing to see his errors, something I think you have long ago given up.
I'm afraid there is no help for you, my friend.
On Sunday, December 29, 2013 6:11:59 PM UTC-5, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
Richard,
It is true I
ALL HAIL TIME CUBE!! http://www.timecube.com/
On Sunday, December 29, 2013 6:35:10 PM UTC-5, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
In order for criticism to be effective, the one being criticized must be
willing to see his errors, something I think you have long ago given up.
I'm afraid
Far from it, really;-) I assure you, I wish you no burning at any stakes,
whether literal or figurative. You are perfectly entitled to be as
incorrect as you wish, especially in an area as solidly established as
relativistic physics.
It's just that (a ma parte, at least), I feel a bit bad for
Hey Craig,
What is the origin of the quote? Also, what privileges the process of
'introspection' to reveal anything contrary to the hypothesis that we are
machines? Isn't introspection a bit of a dubious test for finding out a
thing's machinehood?
Finally, I'm not so sure that it is
Hey everyone,
Here is a question for Bruno (and anyone else who wants to chime in) --
I came across this
posthttp://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2013/11/28/thanksgiving-8/over
at Sean Carroll's Preposterous Universe blog, wherein he seems to be
claiming that the
relationship between
What are the 8 hypostases? I've seen this referred to a few other times on
this list and have never really known what it refers to.
thanks
dan
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 10:30:26 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 29 Oct 2013, at 14:14, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Tuesday, October
Stephen Lin,
Are you on some kind of methamphetamine binge where you think it is totally
cool for you to post vaguely sensible (but mostly nonsensical) thoughts
that drive through your drug addled brain?
Dude, we've all been there, we've got the t-shirts and postcards, and we
are ready for
I think you need to lay off whatever drugs you are doing, find faith in
some kind of higher power, and stop posting in a place on the internet made
for serious thinkers and not lame ass dilletantes such as yourself. You do
know you can comment on Youtube videos, don't you?
On Wednesday,
Put down your crack pipe and seek help
On Tuesday, October 22, 2013 11:23:39 AM UTC-4, Stephen Lin wrote:
Without coaching anyway assume an answer. Trust me, it really is on-optic;
it has something to do with a supercomputer.
Annywy, here does: Give that I am Neo, is it possible for me to
Craig,
As sympathetic as I am to all of your various multisense realism projects
and the different conclusions they are intended to imply,
I must warn you:
If you're going to try to prove black is white, beware the Zebra
crossings...(and if you don't get it, read Douglas Adams and the
Whoa, dude... you just blew my mind!
I love this list!
On Thursday, October 17, 2013 5:46:14 AM UTC-4, Stephen Lin wrote:
A quote I got somewhere: Understanding that the world is a Panopticon is
the easy part; the hard part is figuring out whether you're on the inside
looking out or the
:10 AM UTC-4, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
Sorry to resurrect such an old thread, but I think I'd like to respond
here:
On Saturday, November 10, 2012 4:32:16 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 10 Nov 2012, at 10:11, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
Hey all on the list,
Bruno, I must say
Dear Russell,
Back in 2012, you made the following claims regarding my general attack on
Bruno's
mathematical reductionism:
1) Self-awareness is a requirement for consciousness
2) We expect to find ourselves in an environment sufficiently rich and
complex to support self-aware structures
from
quantia, including their(meaning, my experiences) magically emerge from
the many quants that Bruno's idea seems to require.
On Saturday, October 12, 2013 1:00:38 AM UTC-4, Brent wrote:
On 10/11/2013 9:44 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
Sometimes, Bruno, I get the feeling as though you
The vocable I becomes attached to each impulse that arises in a psychic
complex, no matter how mutually contradictory such impulses may appear to
be. From this process springs the idea of a multitude of me's.
The impulses in question are affective, so that the inferential I is
affective
Hey Craig, thanks for the feedback. Please refer to below:
On Friday, October 11, 2013 5:10:39 AM UTC-4, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Friday, October 11, 2013 2:58:13 AM UTC-4, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
The vocable I becomes attached to each impulse that arises in a psychic
complex, no matter
On Friday, October 11, 2013 2:58:13 AM UTC-4, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
The vocable I becomes attached to each impulse that arises in a psychic
complex, no matter how mutually contradictory such impulses may appear to
be. From this process springs the idea of a multitude of me's
On Friday, October 11, 2013 5:18:44 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 11 Oct 2013, at 08:58, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
The vocable I becomes attached to each impulse that arises in a psychic
complex, no matter how mutually contradictory such impulses may appear to
be. From this process
Sorry to resurrect such an old thread, but I think I'd like to respond
here:
On Saturday, November 10, 2012 4:32:16 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 10 Nov 2012, at 10:11, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
Hey all on the list,
Bruno, I must say, thinking of the UDA. The key assumption
Thanks Craig, you've articulated quite well a number of difficulties in
approaching the hard problem, IMHO. I was reading this article in the SEP
and thought of your approach:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nishida-kitaro/
Look especially under his glossing of the idea of 'pure experience.'
And I have better ways to allocate my time than that.
Coming from a cuckoo clock/roulette wheel... LOL.
--
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
A wise man once said (perhaps it was me, I don't know, I wrote it down but
lost it during my last blackout): BWAH! GET YOUR HANDS OFF MY WALLET YOU
DIRTY FILCHER!
Bacon sure is good. And you know what else is good? Leibniz. But when bacon
is cooking, I don't smell it, I only smell
Hi person from a totally different forum,
I'm just going to post my response to you here in this reading list, even
though it has no bearing on anything that they usually (or at least used
to, before I came along) talk about here, but subtly suggests that if
someone keeps bugging me, I might
Really?! You need proof?
Try:
http://everything-list.105.n7.nabble.com/Not-to-worry-about-global-warming-We-re-long-overdue-for-an-ice-age-starting-iimmediately-td39038.html
http://everything-list.105.n7.nabble.com/Please-read-me-td39055.html
Clever Robot!
On Monday, August 5, 2013 12:41:21 PM UTC-4, John Clark wrote:
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Craig Weinberg
whats...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
in some respects, Roger seems like a shadow version of myself
Does he also engage in astrology and numerology?
John K
of the
monad - the imposter, the anesthetic servant whose job it is to minimize
consciousness, and to make it disappear.
Craig
On Saturday, August 3, 2013 10:59:40 AM UTC-4, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
Roger,
Just because you perceive that people are 'wasting their time' by
providing
The source for the quote given by Maxwell is found here:
Roger,
Just because you perceive that people are 'wasting their time' by providing
their own unique points of view on questions dear to their heart (and not,
by the way, on rehashing simplistic strawmen positions of philosophers that
lived during the Age of Enlightenment) does not give you
A way out west there was a fella,
fella I want to tell you about, fella
by the name of Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz. At
least, that was the handle his lovin'
parents gave him, but he never had
much use for it himself. This
Leibniz, he called himself das Dude.
Now, Dude, that's a name
Should the holes in donuts even count as part of the donut? If so, what of
Timbits?
Could God eat so many donuts that there would be none left for us?
Could we, perhaps term this the donut catastrophe?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything
What is matter?
Never mind.
What is mind?
No matter.
If life isn't non-physical, why can't I understand it?
I think it's time I had some cake
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To unsubscribe from this group and
and their evil propaganda against delicious DDT.
On Friday, August 2, 2013 1:35:31 AM UTC-4, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
Because of Roger Clough, a less than mediocre Lutheran apologist who
considers himself an astute interpreter of Leibniz, a formerly bright
corner of the internet, the Everything List
Clough could have done himself a favor by maybe thinking more and
posting/talking less, or perhaps sharing his delusory thinking with a
psychiatrist, rather than spewing it all over a mostly unmoderated internet
reading list that he has ruined as a result.
Crackpots seem often to be paranoid
There are two different, yet equally fruitless ways of conceiving why Roger
Clough bothers to post garbage all over what used to be a very bright and
interesting list.
One, he is old and retired, so he has little else to fill his days.
The other reason is that he thinks his ideas have some
Because of Roger Clough, a less than mediocre Lutheran apologist who
considers himself an astute interpreter of Leibniz, a formerly bright
corner of the internet, the Everything List, has gone mostly dark due to
the intellectual torpor and carelessness that seems to surround everything
Clough
Subjectivity is impossible to understand, so don't bother trying to
understand it.
The best things anyone ever said about subjectivity, consciousness, the
universe, god, or really, basically anything else that you can think of,
were ALL said by one man 500 years ago. His name was Leibniz.
Hey List! (and in particular Bruno)
I have started re-reading the book I mention in the subject line -- after
languishing in my bookshelf for a number of years, I pulled it out and
began noticing the uncanny parallels it had with Bruno's UDA, although it
reaches the same conclusions by some
You're a crackpot and have no business posting on this list and you
contribute nothing of value.
Please go away.
On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 3:33:28 PM UTC-4, Roger Clough wrote:
Christopher Hichens made his name
Attacking our dear Savior.
By now he's dancing in the flames
With
Dear Bruno,
I would like to know what 'doxastic models of consciousness' means, as well
as what means S4Grz - I know Craig was the one who originally used the
term 'doxastic models' but you seemed to know right away what that meant,
so I'd like to know from your perspective what it means;
On Wednesday, February 13, 2013 10:15:53 PM UTC-5, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 13, 2013 7:05:39 PM UTC-5, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
Hi Craig,
Thank you for your very well considered point of view on my original
post. I have some interjections that I would enjoy hearing
Hi Craig,
Thank you for your very well considered point of view on my original post.
I have some interjections that I would enjoy hearing a response to:
On Sunday, January 27, 2013 9:37:03 PM UTC-5, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sunday, January 27, 2013 5:35:22 PM UTC-5, freqflyer07281972 wrote
Is there a way Roger can be banned for a comment like that? Or should the
moderators/admins of this list simply change it to the 'Everything-Nazi
List'?
That's gotta be one of the dumbest and most offensive things I've ever read
on this list.
Roger, get a life.
On Monday, February 4, 2013
Hey everyone,
I've been following this group a lot. I read it everyday and enjoy all of
the wonderful stuff that comes up, even if some of it tends towards ad
hominem, argument from authority, and petitio principi. Hey, we're humans,
right? That means we get to make these fallacies, in good
Dear Telmo,
With my recent post fresh in my mind, I think I can engage with you a bit
on the meaning and purpose of meditation.
I think the main point of meditation is to see 'what is' for 'what it is.'
Nothing more, nothing less.
All 'other worlds, other universes, other possibilities' are
On Saturday, November 10, 2012 3:00:33 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 11/10/2012 1:11 AM, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
Hey all on the list,
Bruno, I must say, thinking of the UDA. The key assumption is this
teleportation
business, and wouldn't it really be quite Ockham's Razorish
Hey all on the list,
Bruno, I must say, thinking of the UDA. The key assumption is this
teleportation business, and wouldn't it really be quite Ockham's Razorish
to simply conclude from the entire argument that the correct substitution
level is, in principle, not only not knowable, but not
Dear Bruno and other loyal followers of the list,
I had a thought tonight -- half baked and somewhat vague, but nevertheless
I thought relevant to your discussions here...
Is it not true, on the basis of what you laid out in Sane2004, that there
is a necessarily inverse relationship between
Is anyone here aware of the following?
http://www.tgdaily.com/general-sciences-features/66654-heisenbergs-uncertainty-principle-in-doubt
Does it have implications for MW interpretations of quantum physics?
I'd love to see comments about this.
Cheers,
Dan
--
You received this message
Hey there,
I don't often post on this board, but I follow it quite frequently,
and perhaps I might inject a 'fresh voice' to rescue this thread of a
cul-de-sac of its own. It's essentially buddhist in nature rather than
mathematical or computational, so forgive me if I appear presumptuous,
or off
Hey There,
I love reading the posts on this group, and I find a lot of the ideas
mindblowing (and more than occasionally over my head) but I was
wondering if anyone could clarify this question(s):
1) Is QI implied by UDA and comp?
2) Is QI implied by ASSA/RSSA?
More generally, what is the
Hi There,
I've been an avid reader of this group for a long time, and I always
come here to try to think through the BIG questions... because I think
the everything theory is, really let's face it, about as big as things
get...
that being said, I wanted to contribute something, albeit a
Hi everyone,
This is my first post to this group. I find so many of the posts so
fascinating, but I am still immersing myself in the discussion, so
forgive the somewhat trivial direction of the present post.
I found a website memorializing James Higgo's thoughts on quantum
physics, quantum
78 matches
Mail list logo
