Barbour's mistake: An alternative to a timless Platonia

Those who have read my past threads and seen the summary of my metaphysics analysis (Mathematico-Cognition Reality Theory-MCRT) know that I think that time is an irreducible property of reality and my analysis suggests that even Barbour's configuration space (Platonia, the Multiverse whatever you

Re: The Fourth Hypostase, String Theory, Diophantus and the Monster

I've thought of bringing up the Monster group here before, but I didn't think anyone here would be that weird, since I even get weird reactions to my ideas about the Riemann zeta function. I've noticed the connection with the number 26 also. (By the way, for some unknown reason in my childhood

RE: Reality, the bogus nature of the Turing test

--- Colin Hales [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (among a lot other things, quoted and replied to): I disagree and can show empirical proof that we scientists only THINK we are not being solipsistic. I wrote in this sense lately (for the past say 40 years) but now I tend to change my solipsistic mind

Re: The Fourth Hypostase, String Theory, Diophantus and the Monster

Tom Caylor wrote: I've thought of bringing up the Monster group here before, but I didn't think anyone here would be that weird, since I even get weird reactions to my ideas about the Riemann zeta function. I've noticed the connection with the number 26 also. (By the way, for some unknown

Re: Reality, the bogus nature of the Turing test

Colin Hales wrote: 1Z snip Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 3:19 AM Brent Meeker It wouldn't make any difference: if solipsism were true, people would behave exactly as they do behave, most of them not giving the idea that there is no external world any consideration at

Re: Reality, the bogus nature of the Turing test

Colin Hales wrote: So I ask again HOW would we act DIFFERENTLY if we acted as-if MIND EXISTED. So far the only difference I SEE is writing a lot of stuff in CAPS. Brent Meeker FIRSTLY Formally we would investigate new physics of underlying reality such as this: Why not

RE: Reality, the bogus nature of the Turing test

1Z Colin Hales wrote: So I ask again HOW would we act DIFFERENTLY if we acted as-if MIND EXISTED. So far the only difference I SEE is writing a lot of stuff in CAPS. Brent Meeker FIRSTLY Formally we would investigate new physics of underlying reality such as this:

Re: Barbour's mistake: An alternative to a timless Platonia

New Scientist Article: Do the laws of nature last forever? Top physics theorist Lee Smolin has also come out against timelessness. He points out in the article that intuitionalist logics allow for shifting math truths and a non-static configuration space for the universe. Nice to have my