On 28 Sep 2011, at 17:48, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sep 28, 10:26 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 27 Sep 2011, at 22:35, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sep 27, 9:20 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote:
N. Millions of neurons fire simultaneously in separate regions
On 28 Sep 2011, at 15:53, Pierz wrote:
At what point does mathematical truth stop? It seems to be the
existence of
some would imply the existence of all.
Like I said, I need to let this marinate in my consciousness a while.
I agree that all mathematical constructs must have the same kind
On 29 Sep 2011, at 04:11, Pierz wrote:
Not at all. That would be a physicalist revisionist definition of
numbers. You need to instantiate 17, in some way, to talk about 17,
but 17 itself does not need instantiation. With or without any
physical universe, 17 remain a prime number.
With or
On 28 Sep 2011, at 16:44, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/27/2011 10:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 27 Sep 2011, at 13:49, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/26/2011 7:56 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
snip
For well-defined propositions regarding the numbers I think the
values are confined to true or
On 9/28/2011 10:11 PM, Pierz wrote:
Not at all. That would be a physicalist revisionist definition of
numbers. You need to instantiate 17, in some way, to talk about 17,
but 17 itself does not need instantiation. With or without any
physical universe, 17 remain a prime number.
With or
On Sep 29, 3:21 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 28 Sep 2011, at 17:48, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sep 28, 10:26 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 27 Sep 2011, at 22:35, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sep 27, 9:20 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 8:55 AM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
If it takes the brain 100 ms to compute a moment of awareness, then you can
know you were not created 1 microsecond ago.
Suppose your brain paused for 1 us every 99 ms. To an external
observer you would be functioning
On Sep 29, 2011, at 8:12 AM, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 8:55 AM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
wrote:
If it takes the brain 100 ms to compute a moment of awareness, then
you can
know you were not created 1 microsecond ago.
Suppose your
On 29 Sep 2011, at 14:36, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sep 29, 3:21 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 28 Sep 2011, at 17:48, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sep 28, 10:26 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 27 Sep 2011, at 22:35, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sep 27, 9:20
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 1:45 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
The neural processes and the thoughts are different views of the same
thing. In the case of voluntarily imagining something, it is the
subjective content of the experiences being imagined which makes sense
and the
On 9/29/2011 4:03 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 28 Sep 2011, at 16:44, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/27/2011 10:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 27 Sep 2011, at 13:49, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/26/2011 7:56 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
snip
For well-defined propositions regarding the numbers I
On 9/29/2011 10:36 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/29/2011 4:03 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 28 Sep 2011, at 16:44, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/27/2011 10:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 27 Sep 2011, at 13:49, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/26/2011 7:56 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
snip
For
On 9/29/2011 12:22 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
OK. But this is non communicable by (sound) machines. In fact in the ethics of the
ideally correct machine, asserting moral principle is immoral. We can only encourage
people to understand or discover this by themselves.
Bruno
Several times you
On 9/29/2011 6:12 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 8:55 AM, Jason Reschjasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
If it takes the brain 100 ms to compute a moment of awareness, then you can
know you were not created 1 microsecond ago.
Suppose your brain paused for 1 us every 99 ms. To
On 29 Sep 2011, at 19:24, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/29/2011 6:12 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 8:55 AM, Jason Reschjasonre...@gmail.com
wrote:
If it takes the brain 100 ms to compute a moment of awareness,
then you can
know you were not created 1 microsecond ago.
On 29 Sep 2011, at 19:09, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/29/2011 12:22 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
OK. But this is non communicable by (sound) machines. In fact in
the ethics of the ideally correct machine, asserting moral
principle is immoral. We can only encourage people to understand or
discover
On 9/29/2011 11:23 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 29 Sep 2011, at 19:24, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/29/2011 6:12 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 8:55 AM, Jason Reschjasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
If it takes the brain 100 ms to compute a moment of awareness, then you can
know
On Sep 29, 10:29 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
I don't feel this very compelling.
You have to assume some primitive matter, and notion of localization.
Why? I think you only have to assume the appearance of matter and
localization, which we do already.
This is the kind of
On Sep 29, 10:31 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote:
There *is* a strictly neurological reason for the 3-P observable
behaviour. If we limit ourselves to talking about that, do you agree?
I would say no, because I would not describe something like 'gambling'
as strictly
Craig, do the neurons violate the conservation of energy and
momentum? And if not, then how can they have any unexpected effects?
Jason
On Sep 29, 2011, at 6:43 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sep 29, 10:31 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote:
There
20 matches
Mail list logo
