On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 3:27 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4 January 2014 09:01, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 2:50 PM, scerir sce...@libero.it wrote:
It's not many worlds, it's a Uni_ that is _versing itself.
UNIty in diVERSity
-scerir
BTW, did
Hmm. Intriguing. The thing is, everyone tells me an interpretation can't
affect QM itself
.oh, I'm going to have to read the darn paper, aren't I?! (Whether it
will make a scintilla of sense to my brain (at least in some branches of
the multiverse) is another question, of course...)
Well the abstract's nice and clear, at least - they attempt to show that
quantum states are not merely information structures relating to some
(unknown) underlynig reality. Presumably that indicates that they *are* the
reality.I will read on.
On 4 January 2014 11:22, LizR lizj...@gmail.com
On 29 December 2013 13:11, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote:
Jason and John,
If something is random it can't be computed by any deterministic process.
That's the meaning.
I thought the digits of pi were random, but computable by a deterministic
process?
--
You received this message
On 28 Dec 2013, at 16:24, Jason Resch wrote:
On Dec 28, 2013, at 7:04 AM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net
wrote:
Jason,
Have you gotten to Part III of my book on Reality yet? It explains
how all randomness is quantum, and it explains the source of that
randomness is the lack of any
in my book on Reality, all randomness is quantum. There
simply is no true classical level randomness. There is plenty of non-
computability which is often mistaken for randomness but all true
randomness at the classical level percolates up from the quantum
level.
At the fundamental
have to justify the wave and
physics. He still has to assume QM to have its sort of subjective
probability. The comp FPI is conceptually more general, as it does not
assume any physics at all. Everett indeterminacy can be seen as a
particular case of FPI, if we assume the wave and if we
On 29 Dec 2013, at 11:37, LizR wrote:
On 29 December 2013 13:11, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote:
Jason and John,
If something is random it can't be computed by any deterministic
process. That's the meaning.
I thought the digits of pi were random, but computable by a
deterministic
On Dec 29, 2013, at 4:37 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 December 2013 13:11, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote:
Jason and John,
If something is random it can't be computed by any deterministic
process. That's the meaning.
I thought the digits of pi were random, but
On 12/29/2013 2:37 AM, LizR wrote:
On 29 December 2013 13:11, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net mailto:edgaro...@att.net
wrote:
Jason and John,
If something is random it can't be computed by any deterministic process.
That's the
meaning.
I thought the digits of pi were random, but
Well OK, but that's *one* way in which randomness isn't quantum.
On 30 December 2013 07:59, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 12/29/2013 2:37 AM, LizR wrote:
On 29 December 2013 13:11, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote:
Jason and John,
If something is random it can't be
Jason,
Have you gotten to Part III of my book on Reality yet? It explains how all
randomness is quantum, and it explains the source of that randomness is the
lack of any governing deterministic equations when the mini-spacetimes that
emerge from quantum events have be aligned due to linking
On Dec 28, 2013, at 7:04 AM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote:
Jason,
Have you gotten to Part III of my book on Reality yet? It explains
how all randomness is quantum, and it explains the source of that
randomness is the lack of any governing deterministic equations when
the mini
of the source of randomness that deserves a separate topic.
As I explain in my book on Reality, all randomness is quantum. There
simply is no true classical level randomness. There is plenty of
non-computability which is often mistaken for randomness but all true
randomness at the classical level
in a new topic as they raised the important
topic of the source of randomness that deserves a separate topic.
As I explain in my book on Reality, all randomness is quantum. There
simply is no true classical level randomness. There is plenty of
non-computability which is often mistaken
of wavefunction evolution governed by
the Schroedinger equation).
Jesse
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Dec 28, 2013, at 7:04 AM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote:
Jason,
Have you gotten to Part III of my book on Reality yet? It explains how all
that can be an ordered state if much
more elements are included) - not to mention my insecurity when it comes
to 'data' (what kind?) etc. in an unlimited agnostic view.
Your #2-a - we are not in a position of restricting a process into
'nondeterminism' without the knowledge of ALL possible
on Reality, all randomness is quantum. There
simply is no true classical level randomness. There is plenty of
non-computability which is often mistaken for randomness but all true
randomness at the classical level percolates up from the quantum level.
At the fundamental computational level all
On 12/28/2013 4:11 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
Jason and John,
If something is random it can't be computed by any deterministic process. That's the
meaning.
That's one possible meaning, although it can only strictly apply to infinite sets of
something. I think of random as just being an
Replying to Liz and Jason in a new topic as they raised the important topic
of the source of randomness that deserves a separate topic.
As I explain in my book on Reality, all randomness is quantum. There simply
is no true classical level randomness. There is plenty of non-computability
which
Assuming everything is quantum (as most physicists do) then clearly all
randomness must be.
--
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 everything-list
On 12/27/2013 8:52 PM, LizR wrote:
Assuming everything is quantum (as most physicists do) then clearly all
randomness must be.
But note that Bruno wants to avoid this by making first-person continuity
uncertain.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
On 28 December 2013 19:45, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 12/27/2013 8:52 PM, LizR wrote:
Assuming everything is quantum (as most physicists do) then clearly all
randomness must be.
But note that Bruno wants to avoid this by making first-person continuity
uncertain.
Hmm
On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote:
Replying to Liz and Jason in a new topic as they raised the important
topic of the source of randomness that deserves a separate topic.
As I explain in my book on Reality, all randomness is quantum. There
simply
Hi Liz, Hi Richard,
On 21 Dec 2013, at 20:43, LizR wrote:
On 21 December 2013 23:23, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 21 Dec 2013, at 10:22, LizR wrote:
On 21 December 2013 22:18, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 20 Dec 2013, at 18:48, Richard Ruquist wrote:
Bruno: In
This is an ancient story that I would be embarrassed for anyone to read and
intend to leave where it is. However I could send you my latest one,
although it is unfinished... mind you so was that one. I seem to have a
problem with finishing...
On 23 December 2013 01:53, Bruno Marchal
,
and such question might need the resolution of the quantum gravity
question.
With comp, we can say things like that: IF there are n multiverses,
THEN they cannot interfere statistically and so you are in only
one of them (if not they will comp-interfere), and thus they must be
all small
On 21 December 2013 22:18, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 20 Dec 2013, at 18:48, Richard Ruquist wrote:
Bruno: In that case a multiverse could contain another multiverse, a bit
like a black hole could be a door to another universe.
Richard: I like that idea because Smolin
Hello Stephen,
Does there really need to be a single level of the UD?
?
What is the UD is intersecting with itself an infinite number of
times?
The UD emulates itself infinitely often, with all codes, that is:
relatively to all universal numbers.
Is there a relationship
On 21 Dec 2013, at 10:22, LizR wrote:
On 21 December 2013 22:18, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 20 Dec 2013, at 18:48, Richard Ruquist wrote:
Bruno: In that case a multiverse could contain another multiverse,
a bit like a black hole could be a door to another universe.
principle in Einstein-Cartan gravity
Nikodem Poplawskihttp://arxiv.org/find/gr-qc/1/au:+Poplawski_N/0/1/0/all/0/1
Comments: 3 pages
Subjects: General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology (gr-qc); High Energy
Physics - Theory (hep-th); Quantum Physics (quant-ph)
2. arXiv:1305.6977 http://arxiv.org/abs
), and thus they must be all small (=
not emulating a UD). So, only one multiverse might contain a physical
universal dovetailing.
Is the quantum vacuum a physical universal dovetailer?
Is the Everett universal wave a physical universal dovetailer?
Is the solution of the comp measure problem
14:15, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
If it's all just math, what is the unexpected surprise that makes it
funny? Is math surprised that its math?
On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 2:07:47 AM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
http://abstrusegoose.com/544
Brent
--
You
On Friday, December 20, 2013 5:26:15 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 20 Dec 2013, at 02:15, Craig Weinberg wrote:
If it's all just math, what is the unexpected surprise that makes it
funny? Is math surprised that its math?
It is of course only surprising for those deluded (assuming
On 21 December 2013 23:23, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 21 Dec 2013, at 10:22, LizR wrote:
On 21 December 2013 22:18, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 20 Dec 2013, at 18:48, Richard Ruquist wrote:
Bruno: In that case a multiverse could contain another multiverse, a
Oops sorry you weren't replying to me. I should have read the complete
thread before I answered.
:-(
On 22 December 2013 08:43, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 21 December 2013 23:23, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 21 Dec 2013, at 10:22, LizR wrote:
On 21 December 2013 22:18,
On 22 December 2013 04:56, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, December 19, 2013 8:24:55 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote:
The unexpected surprise is the jump up the reductionist food chain in
the last frame.
Right, but its only surprising because there is something that we
Also, part of the joke is the hubris / chutzpah of the interviewee, who is
attempting to parlay a degree (or whatever it is) in comparative literature
into a job at CERN (or wherever it is).
On 22 December 2013 08:55, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 22 December 2013 04:56, Craig Weinberg
On 20 Dec 2013, at 02:15, Craig Weinberg wrote:
If it's all just math, what is the unexpected surprise that makes it
funny? Is math surprised that its math?
It is of course only surprising for those deluded (assuming comp) into
thinking that there is some primitive non mathematical
What surprises me is that apparently comp predicts a single multiverse
rather than than multiple multiverses.
Richard
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 5:26 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 20 Dec 2013, at 02:15, Craig Weinberg wrote:
If it's all just math, what is the unexpected
statistically and so you are in only one
of them (if not they will comp-interfere), and thus they must be all
small (= not emulating a UD). So, only one multiverse might contain
a physical universal dovetailing.
Is the quantum vacuum a physical universal dovetailer?
Is the Everett universal wave
that: IF there are n multiverses, THEN
they cannot interfere statistically and so you are in only one of them
(if not they will comp-interfere), and thus they must be all small (=
not emulating a UD). So, only one multiverse might contain a physical
universal dovetailing.
Is the quantum vacuum a physical
Dear Bruno,
Does there really need to be a single level of the UD? What is the UD is
intersecting with itself an infinite number of times? Is there a
relationship. maybe an isomorphism, between the UD and the set of Godel
numbers of the UD? After all, there does not exist a unique universal
If it's all just math, what is the unexpected surprise that makes it funny?
Is math surprised that its math?
On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 2:07:47 AM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
http://abstrusegoose.com/544
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
The unexpected surprise is the jump up the reductionist food chain in the
last frame.
On 20 December 2013 14:15, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
If it's all just math, what is the unexpected surprise that makes it
funny? Is math surprised that its math?
On Wednesday, December
That looks familiar. Have you posted it before?
(Or maybe I just saw a cartoon like it once...)
Because when you consider it, there are really only a few jokes, and some
can be considered as basically just elaborations of simpler ones.
...skipping to the end, Jerry whacks Tom with a frying pan
http://abstrusegoose.com/544
Brent
--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send
That's a good one. Thanks for sharing it. :-)
Jason
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 1:07 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
http://abstrusegoose.com/544
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To unsubscribe from this
My fellow Africans some brilliant cold (sore) case detective work! A relatively
simpler parasitical life form has been studied in its association with humans
to provide an independent line of genetic evidence that supports the out of
Africa hypothesis.
HUMANS all come FROM AFRICA: HERPES does
I didn't realise there was still much doubt about this. I thought studying
human DNA had made the out of Africa hypothesis fairly robust. (Obviously
more confirming evidence will add another sigma, or whatever...)
?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Exactly, this adds an independent line of DNA evidence that supports this
hypothesis.
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 2:28 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: HUMANS all come
On 23 October 2013 11:04, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote:
Exactly, this adds an independent line of DNA evidence that supports this
hypothesis.
OK, fair enough. I just thought the headline *HUMANS all come FROM AFRICA:
HERPES does not lie* seemed to indicate that the writer
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 10:28:19AM +1300, LizR wrote:
I didn't realise there was still much doubt about this. I thought studying
human DNA had made the out of Africa hypothesis fairly robust. (Obviously
more confirming evidence will add another sigma, or whatever...)
There is some evidence
-research
-into-human-origins.html?pagewanted=all_r=0
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Russell Standish
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 3:33 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: HUMANS all come FROM
Of Russell Standish
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 3:33 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: HUMANS all come FROM AFRICA: HERPES does not lie
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 10:28:19AM +1300, LizR wrote:
I didn't realise there was still much doubt about this. I thought
studying human
, 2013 4:36 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: HUMANS all come FROM AFRICA: HERPES does not lie
Where do pigs come in? :)
On 23 October 2013 12:24, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote:
Yes... and some very interesting stuff too... It's also interesting also how
-ennobling creation story LOL.
** **
*From:* everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:
everything-list@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *LizR
*Sent:* Tuesday, October 22, 2013 4:36 PM
*To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com
*Subject:* Re: HUMANS all come FROM AFRICA: HERPES does not lie
its not all that bad. The pig's name was Bloodwynn.
Sincerely,
Spudwinn
-Original Message-
From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: __aolWsbDateToL10n__@_aol_wsl_date_@__aolWsbDateToL10n__
Subject: Re: HUMANS all come FROM AFRICA
: the virus spread all over
and infected the diverse types of developing 'homo'-s from simianic origins
more than the ONE we assign today in our desultory justification with the
African type. I could use more paleontological justification than
conclusions from a jaw...(to be fascetious).
Not only
On 10/22/2013 5:47 PM, LizR wrote:
That's the one. I don't know if it's true, or if someone's been telling porkies.
On 23 October 2013 13:43, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com
mailto:cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote:
Are you referring to the hypothesis that human’s are the result of a
I read in Elain Morgan's (Oxford UK) Aquatic Ape book an enjoyable
comparison between human characteristic and those of pigs.
It is not about hybridization at all. Enjoyable reading stuff.
(The book is quite different from th recent denigration of the 'topic' into
the mermaids and creationist
not exclude infection
later during higher steps of development. Say: the virus spread all over
and infected the diverse types of developing 'homo'-s from simianic origins
more than the ONE we assign today in our desultory justification with the
African type. I could use more paleontological
.
It is not about hybridization at all. Enjoyable reading stuff.
(The book is quite different from th recent denigration of the 'topic'
into the mermaids and creationist aberrations).
JM
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 7:36 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
Where do pigs come in? :)
On 23 October
inseminating
apes. this is the antidote of all these other stories
Asserting instead how we are hairless pig-apes; and come to think of it we
rather do behave like pigs. so maybe there is something to it ;)
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
species of any noble origin – such as say crafted in the image of God
almighty or interbred with star people in little flying saucers
inseminating apes… this is the antidote of all these other stories
Asserting instead how we are hairless pig-apes; and come to think of it we
rather do behave
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Mikes
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 7:07 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: HUMANS all come FROM AFRICA: HERPES does not lie
Russell - and others: not that I would pretend
+leatherwor
ker/)
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Russell Standish
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 8:05 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: HUMANS all come FROM AFRICA: HERPES does not lie
and a common sense respect for the inner experience of others and a
basic adhering to the Golden Rule... calling this an industry -- as if it was
some kind of semantic assembly line with gate keepers, word police etc. all
organized into some PC enforcement industry that you imagine exists, to my ears
rcl...@verizon.net
Political correctness is likely to get you killed.
We are all naturally racists. Blame it on Darwin. Zenophobia --
fear or dislike of outsiders--is what has allowed us to survive.
Unfortunately the liberalized dictionaries I can find online refer
to it as abnormal
as
elements of
cohesion. See my other posts.
The recently converted moral zealots of antiracism -or whatever is in
fashion now- are scanning you. Take care
2013/7/17 Roger Clough rcl...@verizon.net
Political correctness is likely to get you killed.
We are all naturally racists. Blame
of antiracism -or whatever is in
fashion now- are scanning you. Take care
2013/7/17 Roger Clough rcl...@verizon.net
Political correctness is likely to get you killed.
We are all naturally racists. Blame it on Darwin. Zenophobia --
fear or dislike of outsiders--is what has allowed
On 7/23/2013 2:13 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
It seems that everything-list has become a self-help group and anti-racism a form of
negative religión. Don´t you feel a form of holyness when you say so pretty things at
zero cost?.
I would say that you are antiracist and good human beings if you
Don´t make me laugh.
I don´t say that racism isn't a bad thing. It is. I say that the industry
of antiracism enforcement is an evil thing. Like is evil to enforce public
plumbing. Since I bet you are not stupid understanding ordinary arguments.
I have to think that you are misleading.
I
to speak.
-Original Message-
From: Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Cc: - Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net
Sent: Mon, Jul 22, 2013 2:21 pm
Subject: Re: We are all naturally racists. Political correctness is likely to
get you killed
plan and his
interactiond of all of them with the environment.
But what is natural here? That a animal mother kill his cabs seems
unnatural, but that is part of the natural behaviour in case of extreme
starvation. Allthough this is an extreme case that may be called aberrant,
it is by no means
On Tuesday, July 23, 2013 3:07:53 PM UTC-4, Alberto G.Corona wrote:
Don´t make me laugh.
I don´t say that racism isn't a bad thing. It is. I say that the
industry of antiracism enforcement is an evil thing. Like is evil to
enforce public plumbing.
I'm sure that you don't mean to
.
It produces molesting busybodies in the name of the common good an freedom
. And the worst of all, it is boring and sterile, because the only good
thing that they can teach are obvious things that everyone know.
2013/7/24 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com
On Tuesday, July 23, 2013 3:07:53 PM
.
Like the example, political correctness is dirty in the name of cleanness.
It produces molesting busybodies in the name of the common good an freedom
. And the worst of all, it is boring and sterile, because the only good
thing that they can teach are obvious things that everyone know.
I
as
elements of cohesion. See my other posts.
The recently converted moral zealots of antiracism -or whatever is in
fashion now- are scanning you. Take care
2013/7/17 Roger Clough rcl...@verizon.net javascript:
Political correctness is likely to get you killed.
We are all
zealots of antiracism -or whatever is in
fashion now- are scanning you. Take care
2013/7/17 Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net
Political correctness is likely to get you killed.
We are all naturally racists. Blame it on Darwin. Zenophobia --
fear or dislike of outsiders--is what has allowed
On 17 Jul 2013, at 22:19, Richard Ruquist wrote:
My chickens are racist. That is, being free range, they tend to hang
out in clusters where color is the common denominator.
That suggests to me that racism is a natural phenomenon. Richard
Racism or xenophobia are natural, yes, but that does
. See my other posts.
The recently converted moral zealots of antiracism -or whatever is in
fashion now- are scanning you. Take care
2013/7/17 Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net
Political correctness is likely to get you killed.
We are all naturally racists. Blame it on Darwin. Zenophobia
Political correctness is likely to get you killed.
We are all naturally racists. Blame it on Darwin. Zenophobia --
fear or dislike of outsiders--is what has allowed us to survive.
Unfortunately the liberalized dictionaries I can find online refer
to it as abnormal or irrational
without ever avoiding any race
and nothing bad happened.
We are all naturally racists. Blame it on Darwin. Zenophobia --
fear or dislike of outsiders--is what has allowed us to survive.
Rape was really big back in the day too. Should we also go back to that?
Unfortunately the liberalized
...@verizon.net wrote:
Political correctness is likely to get you killed.
We are all naturally racists. Blame it on Darwin. Zenophobia --
fear or dislike of outsiders--is what has allowed us to survive.
Unfortunately the liberalized dictionaries I can find online refer
to it as abnormal
On 17 Jul 2013, at 15:52, Roger Clough wrote:
Jesus said to love our neighbors, but he didn't say to
go looking for strangers to love.
On the boundaries the neighbor is the stranger.
Bruno
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to
@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wed, Jul 17, 2013 2:17 pm
Subject: Re: We are all naturally racists. Political correctness is likely to
get you killed.
On 17 Jul 2013, at 15:52, Roger Clough wrote:
Jesus said to love our neighbors, but he didn't say to
go looking for strangers to love.
On the boundaries
My chickens are racist. That is, being free range, they tend to hang out in
clusters where color is the common denominator.
That suggests to me that racism is a natural phenomenon. Richard
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 2:17 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 17 Jul 2013, at 15:52, Roger
other fundamental metaphysical issues like consciousness, it doesn't
belong here.
Jesse
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
Political correctness is likely to get you killed.
We are all naturally racists. Blame it on Darwin. Zenophobia --
fear
where someone acting according to politically incorrect
stereotypes could make themselves safer.
Jason
--- Original Message ---
From: Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com
Sent: 18 July 2013 6:59 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: We are all naturally racists. Political
any hint of it.
I feel like banging my head with a bible.
From: jasonre...@gmail.com
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: We are all naturally racists. Political correctness is likely to
get you killed.
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 19:37:49 -0500
On Jul 17, 2013, at 5:21 PM, chris
Looking for energy in all the wrong places. Plato's One vs. zero point energy
as the ultimate source of energy.
If we compare the metaphysics of Aristostle and Plato,
we see that Aristotle's fundamental level is the bottom
level of Being, that of matter. Plato's metraphysics
Looking for energy in all the wrong places. Plato's One vs. zero point energy
as the ultimate source of energy.
If we compare the metaphysics of Aristostle and Plato,
we see that Aristotle's fundamental level is the bottom
level of Being, that of matter. Plato's metraphysics
Astronomical observations of the cosmological constant has falsified the
hypothesis that all energy comes from zero-point energy by 120 orders of
magnitude, probably the strongest falsification ever achieved.
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
*Looking
. This also implies that there is no such thing as Planck scale
'foaminess'!
On Tuesday, June 25, 2013 8:51:47 AM UTC-4, yanniru wrote:
Astronomical observations of the cosmological constant has falsified the
hypothesis that all energy comes from zero-point energy by 120 orders of
magnitude
On 6/25/2013 1:27 PM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
One wonders why this simple observed fact does not percolate down to the masses that
continue to spout nonsense that is contrary to the fact. The zero point energy is, at
best, electromagnetic in nature and since it is off-mass-shell cannot
in the
Google Groups Everything List group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/everything-list/YG6eX_qL0bE/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send
This note is addressed to all materialists, especially Prof. Dennett. Getting
from me to I'
Self-reference could be a subject/predicate relation. But that doesn't say
enough because
there are two possible perspectives:
1) He is a man. Here you are referencing yourself in the 3rd person
On 16 Jun 2013, at 15:11, Roger Clough wrote:
This note is addressed to all materialists, especially Prof.
Dennett. Getting from me to I'
Self-reference could be a subject/predicate relation. But that
doesn't say enough because
there are two possible perspectives:
1) He is a man. Here
On 31 Dec 2012, at 18:55, Brian Tenneson wrote:
So is that a yes? If so, can you stipulate such a physical object?
On Sunday, December 30, 2012 9:08:27 PM UTC-8, Brent wrote:
On 12/30/2012 11:23 AM, Brian Tenneson wrote:
Is there a physical object that exists physically which is not
501 - 600 of 1074 matches
Mail list logo
