On 20 May 2011, at 19:44, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/20/2011 3:54 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2011, at 18:54, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/18/2011 9:21 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Brent,
Interesting! If we follow this idea, that memory is not
necessary for consciousness, then
On 20 May 2011, at 22:18, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/20/2011 3:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2011, at 19:47, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Rex,
A very good point! There must be a place for false memories in
our modal logics.
Indeed. and G* proves DBf. Lies and falsities abounds in
On 20 May 2011, at 22:44, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Brent and Bruno,
From: meekerdb
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2011 1:44 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 5/20/2011 3:54 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2011, at 18:54, meekerdb
On 5/21/2011 4:04 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 20 May 2011, at 19:44, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/20/2011 3:54 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2011, at 18:54, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/18/2011 9:21 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Brent,
Interesting! If we follow this idea, that memory is not
On 5/21/2011 4:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
3-OMs are sequenced by the computations they belongs too. 1-OM are
structured by the topology on those computations derived from the
application of Theaetetus' theory of knowledge.
What topology is that? What's the open set?
Brent
--
You
On 21 May 2011, at 19:13, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/21/2011 4:04 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 20 May 2011, at 19:44, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/20/2011 3:54 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2011, at 18:54, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/18/2011 9:21 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Brent,
On 21 May 2011, at 19:15, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/21/2011 4:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
3-OMs are sequenced by the computations they belongs too. 1-OM
are structured by the topology on those computations derived from
the application of Theaetetus' theory of knowledge.
What topology is
Hi Bruno,
-Original Message-
From: Bruno Marchal
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2011 3:28 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 21 May 2011, at 19:15, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/21/2011 4:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
3-OMs are sequenced
!
Stephen
-Original Message- From: Bruno Marchal
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 10:58 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 18 May 2011, at 02:46, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/17/2011 5:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
snip
It is also difficult
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 5/18/2011 7:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
That is how meditation and dissociative drug can help you to
remind the consciousness of the blanche machine, the
consciousness of the virgin Löbian machine. Memories
. All this work
because we cannot know that we are consistent.
Bruno
Onward!
Stephen
-Original Message- From: Rex Allen
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 1:30 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:38 AM
On 5/20/2011 3:54 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2011, at 18:54, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/18/2011 9:21 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Brent,
Interesting! If we follow this idea, that memory is not
necessary for consciousness, then consciousness does not require a
persistent structure
Hi Brent and Bruno,
From: meekerdb
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2011 1:44 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 5/20/2011 3:54 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2011, at 18:54, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/18/2011 9:21 AM, Stephen Paul
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 1:35 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
It may have started a nanosecond
ago, even though I remember starting to count up from zero and am now
at the number ten. That is, I am at the number ten but it may only be
the last part, the n of the ten that I have
On 5/19/2011 4:45 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 1:35 AM, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote:
It may have started a nanosecond
ago, even though I remember starting to count up from zero and am now
at the number ten. That is, I am at the number ten but it may only
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:41 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
The important point for this argument is that we would have no way of
knowing if Last Tuesdayism is true, and this shows that the OM's can be
sequenced implicitly from their content.
Only if their content is sufficiently
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:37:29AM +1000, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:41 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
The important point for this argument is that we would have no way of
knowing if Last Tuesdayism is true, and this shows that the OM's can be
On 5/19/2011 6:08 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:37:29AM +1000, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:41 AM, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote:
The important point for this argument is that we would have no way of
knowing if Last Tuesdayism
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 07:50:57PM -0700, meekerdb wrote:
Is this the psi of the universe or just of the observer (which
observer)? How is it unit of experience?
It is closer to the psi of the universe concept than anything
else. Here, a universe means either a single observer moment, or a
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 5:40 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
The other theory that Stathis is explicating takes OM's to be atomic and
discrete. In that case they would have to be strung together by some
internal reference, one to another. I don't think that's a viable theory
since
On 18 May 2011, at 02:46, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/17/2011 5:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 16 May 2011, at 19:40, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/16/2011 7:13 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
[SPK]
I was trying to be sure that I took that involves the
possibility that the OMs are computationally
On 5/18/2011 7:51 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 5:40 PM, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote:
The other theory that Stathis is explicating takes OM's to be atomic and
discrete. In that case they would have to be strung together by some
internal reference, one to
On 5/18/2011 7:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
That is how meditation and dissociative drug can help you to remind
the consciousness of the blanche machine, the consciousness of the
virgin Löbian machine. Memories only differentiate consciousness.
Are you claiming that every thought includes a
-
From: Bruno Marchal
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 10:58 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 18 May 2011, at 02:46, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/17/2011 5:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
snip
It is also difficult to see how the empirical experience
On 18 May 2011, at 17:38, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/18/2011 7:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
That is how meditation and dissociative drug can help you to
remind the consciousness of the blanche machine, the
consciousness of the virgin Löbian machine. Memories only
differentiate consciousness.
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 5/18/2011 7:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
That is how meditation and dissociative drug can help you to remind the
consciousness of the blanche machine, the consciousness of the virgin Löbian
machine. Memories only differentiate consciousness
*Subject:* Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 5/18/2011 7:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
That is how meditation and dissociative drug can help you to remind
the consciousness of the blanche machine, the consciousness of
the virgin Löbian machine. Memories only differentiate consciousness
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 1:40 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/16/2011 7:13 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
[SPK]
I was trying to be sure that I took that involves the possibility that
the OMs are computationally disjoint into account. This covers your example,
I think...
I am
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:38 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/18/2011 7:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
That is how meditation and dissociative drug can help you to remind the
consciousness of the blanche machine, the consciousness of the virgin
Löbian machine. Memories only
their implications, a sort of attempt at
a reductio ad absurdum.
Onward!
Stephen
From: meekerdb
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 12:54 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 5/18/2011 9:21 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Brent,
Interesting! If we
: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 18 May 2011, at 17:38, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/18/2011 7:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
That is how meditation and dissociative drug can help you to remind the
consciousness of the blanche machine, the consciousness of the virgin Löbian
machine. Memories only
Allen
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 1:24 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 1:40 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/16/2011 7:13 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
[SPK]
I was trying to be sure that I
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:38 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/18/2011 7:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
That is how meditation and dissociative drug can help you to remind the
consciousness of the blanche
On 5/18/2011 10:44 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Rex,
I agree with you 100%! I am amazed that this idea is considered as
a horrid heresy by most physicists
You seem to have an uninformed opinion of physicists. The physicists I
know don't consider anything heresy because they consider
Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be
*Sent:* Wednesday, May 18, 2011 12:11 PM
*To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com
mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com
*Subject:* Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 18 May 2011, at 17:38, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/18/2011 7:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote
On 5/18/2011 10:30 AM, Rex Allen wrote:
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:38 AM, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/18/2011 7:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
That is how meditation and dissociative drug can help you to remind the
consciousness of the blanche machine, the consciousness of the
Hi Brent,
I am happy to be wrong inn that opinion! But nevertheless finding a
physicists what will admit publicly what you mention is difficult.
Onward!
Stephen
From: meekerdb
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 2:00 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing
: meekerdb
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 2:01 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 5/18/2011 10:39 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Dear Bruno,
How beautifully said! This is a rediscovery of ideas that we find in many
mythological systems
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
*Sent:* Wednesday, May 18, 2011 2:00 PM
*To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com
mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com
*Subject:* Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 5/18/2011 10:44 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Rex,
I agree with you 100%! I am amazed
On 5/18/2011 11:29 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Brent,
Oh you bet! Chopra and those like him have not done us any favors,
but can we truly begrudge people from making a buck of a book that is
a soft version of the ideas we are considering?
I can certainly begrudge a charlatan who
and ask ontological
questions. ;-)
Onward,
Stephen
From: meekerdb
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 3:17 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 5/18/2011 11:29 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Brent,
Oh you bet! Chopra and those like
On 16 May 2011, at 19:40, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/16/2011 7:13 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
[SPK]
I was trying to be sure that I took that involves the possibility
that the OMs are computationally disjoint into account. This covers
your example, I think...
I am wondering how they are
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Stephen Paul King
stephe...@charter.net wrote:
Hi Brent and Everything List Members,
Let me start over and focus on the sequencing of OMs. I argue that the
Schrodinger Equation does not work to generate a sequencing of Observer
moments for multiple
Hi Stathis,
-Original Message-
From: Stathis Papaioannou
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 9:08 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Stephen Paul King
stephe...@charter.net wrote:
Hi Brent and Everything
On 16 May 2011, at 15:08, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Stephen Paul King
stephe...@charter.net wrote:
Hi Brent and Everything List Members,
Let me start over and focus on the sequencing of OMs. I argue
that the
Schrodinger Equation does not work to
On 16 May 2011, at 16:13, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Stathis,
-Original Message- From: Stathis Papaioannou
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 9:08 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Stephen Paul King
On 5/16/2011 7:13 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
[SPK]
I was trying to be sure that I took that involves the possibility
that the OMs are computationally disjoint into account. This covers
your example, I think...
I am wondering how they are strung together, to use the analogy
of
Dear Brent,
-Original Message-
From: meekerdb
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 1:40 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 5/16/2011 7:13 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
[SPK]
I was trying to be sure that I took that involves
Hi Brent and Everything List Members,
Let me start over and focus on the sequencing of OMs. I argue that the
Schrodinger Equation does not work to generate a sequencing of Observer moments
for multiple interacting observers because it assumes a physically unreal
notion of time, the
49 matches
Mail list logo
