On 06 Nov 2012, at 21:34, Russell Standish wrote:
On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 04:54:00AM -0500, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Russell Standish
According to Leibniz's idealistic metaphysics, nothing is causal,
things just appear to happen by cause. Their motions instead
occur according to a pre-establis
On 06 Nov 2012, at 17:45, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
Hi Roger,
If you want to read him that trivially, go ahead. The constant,
eternal revaluation of all values. This is just implied by asking
"what's going on?".
And yes, this is gently consistent with never ending platonic
questio
On 06 Nov 2012, at 03:42, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/5/2012 8:13 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
Even with the Theaetetus’ definition of truth, which I find to
be highly original and amazingly ingenious, we are still left
without an explanation as to how the accidental coincidence of a
Platon
On 11/7/2012 5:41 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Nov 2012, at 03:42, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/5/2012 8:13 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
Even with the Theaetetus’ definition of truth, which I find to
be highly original and amazingly ingenious, we are still left
without an explanation as to how
Can anyone explain why geometry/topology would exist in a comp universe?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/GpiggMAKD74J.
To post to this
On 11/5/2012 1:49 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
[SPK] You are considering only one entity.
This is incorrect. For example the first person plural is defined in
term of duplication of populations of machines sharing universal
numbers/computations.
Dear Bruno,
I would like to restrict my discu
On 11/7/2012 7:42 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Can anyone explain why geometry/topology would exist in a comp universe?
--
Hi Craig,
So far it seems that there is only a singular set of countable
recursive functions (or equivalent) and thus a single Boolean algebra
for the Universal Machine.
On 06 Nov 2012, at 14:33, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
How can you be in two places at once ?
Your soul, or 1p-you, cannot.
Your body, or 3p-you, can be duplicated at the right level (which
exists when assuming comp).
At least in this universe ?
Prisoners in jails would love
On 06 Nov 2012, at 15:30, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
OK. That's analytic uncertainty.
Yes indeed. Almost the opposite of the comp indeterminacy. With comp
we get many form of indetermlinacies and uncertainties.
And analytic deduction cannot really tell us anything new,
it c
Hi Platonist Guitar Cowboy
You're welcome to endorse Nietszche's attack on reason, but I can't see how
anybody could be
a platonist at the same time. Consider this (apparently by somebody else
sympathetic to Nietzsche's views):
http://groups.able2know.org/philforum/topic/1803-1
"In his
Hi Roger Clough,
My understanding is that qualia are subjective or 1-view,
while the realm of science is completely objective (3-view).
I agree. A qualia, like the feeling of being convinced, or like the
feeling of seeing the color red, is subjective (1p).
But now the theory saying that
Hi Russell Standish
Both Leibniz and quantum physics are acausal,
meaning, at least in Leibniz's world, that things
are what they are, they happen as they happen,
whether this be deterministic or probabilistic,
or even eschatollogically caused.
The only constraint Leibniz placed on such actions
So comp does not explain MWI, it just explains many dreams
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> On 06 Nov 2012, at 15:02, Richard Ruquist wrote:
>
>
>
> How has comp explained how there are Many Worlds?
> I presume you mean MWI and many physical worlds, not just many dream
> w
On 06 Nov 2012, at 16:57, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/6/2012 8:26 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 05 Nov 2012, at 16:17, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/5/2012 9:03 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Stephen P. King
Sirius was there before Paul was born.
That position is called realism.
Hi Roger,
Hi Stephen P. King
Your criticism might be valid, but I never made the claim that Berkeley
is said to have made. Leibniz, possibly more like you,
would never have made such a claim. Leibniz believed that God
is purposeful (caused things to happen at least partially due
to end causes).
Roger
Hi Everyone:
This may show up more than once as a few others did. In recent days I have
had issues with my internet connection. It has been 16 hours since I sent
this the second time. This time I tried sending it again and then again as
plain text. Very sorry if my troubles cause some clutter.
On 06 Nov 2012, at 17:02, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/6/2012 8:29 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 05 Nov 2012, at 17:10, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/5/2012 10:35 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Stephen P. King
Infallibility isn't involved. The typical textbook
explanation for realism is, "if a t
On 06 Nov 2012, at 17:05, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/6/2012 8:33 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 05 Nov 2012, at 17:31, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/5/2012 11:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Hi Bruno,
I am using the possibility of a claim to make my argument, not
any actual instance of a cl
Hi Bruno Marchal
I feel exactly as you do. I would never have Nietzsche's books burned,
there is much of value in them. Or at least some value.
His criticism of reason's being used by Christianity, for example, parallels to
an appreciable extent Luther's criticism of the Catholic church,
three
Hi Bruno,
As I read it, the Übermensch is the being that is aware of the limits of
Mensch ideology and values. Of course this can be hijacked to support
discrimination against groups, but only if you want to be dishonest. But he
emphasizes that abandoning the humanist conception of values is only
Hi Bruno Marchal
Yes, by new I mean contingent. But Kant, although his examples
are debatable, at least sought a synthetic a priori,
which of course would be a gold mine, or perhaps a stairway
to the divine.
Pragmatism rejects the idea of there being any
such universals, but I think by abdu
On 06 Nov 2012, at 19:45, John Clark wrote:
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 Bruno Marchal wrote:
> Define "John Clark".
Define "define".
See below.
> the semantic of proper name is the most difficult unsolved
problem in philosophy.
No it is not, the meaning of pronouns like "I" and "He" and
On 07 Nov 2012, at 00:12, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/6/2012 11:01 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Stephen P. King
Even Berkeley had to admit that no forest, no whatever..
was foolishness and so said that in that case, God
observed it. Get real.
Hi Roger,
Then you are explicitly admitting
On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:19:03 AM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
>
> On 11/7/2012 7:42 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> > Can anyone explain why geometry/topology would exist in a comp universe?
> > --
> Hi Craig,
>
> So far it seems that there is only a singular set of countable
>
On 11/7/2012 9:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Nov 2012, at 15:02, Richard Ruquist wrote:
How has comp explained how there are Many Worlds?
I presume you mean MWI and many physical worlds, not just many dream
worlds..
Once comp is assumed, it is easy to prove that all dreams exists in
a
On 11/7/2012 9:24 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
I don't know (nor do I suspect that Leibniz knew)
how one could calculate such a universe in
perfect harmony in advance, but there's no need
for that. It is simply an assumption, and looking
out on the universe, I see no disharmony-- it
all works just fi
Hi Bruno Marchal
I think that dreams are the result of the mind's (not the brain's, as
the article cited below suggests) intelligence trying to make sense of
body signals such as from muscle relaxation, etc.
In bringing up the subject of logical abduction (as well as autopoesis),
these seem to
Dear Friends,
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0307143
Violations of Locality Beyond Bell's Theorem
Zeng-Bing Chen, Sixia Yu, Yong-De Zhang
(Submitted on 20 Jul 2003)
"Locality and realism are two main assumptions in deriving Bell's
inequalities. Though the experimentally demonstrated violat
On 07 Nov 2012, at 13:48, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/5/2012 1:49 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
[SPK] You are considering only one entity.
This is incorrect. For example the first person plural is defined
in term of duplication of populations of machinessharing
universal numbers/comp
Hi Roger,
If you have to quote Nietzsche enemies to make your ideological point, go
ahead. This tells its own story, I don't have to comment further on. The
Slave/Master thing boils down to something simpler than all this: do we
want to rule ourselves or be ruled? Platonism he attacks insofar, as
Hi Craig Weinberg
I don't really know, but one starts with one point (a number ?)
then two points to form a line, then rotation of that line to form
an angle and a plane as well. I don't see why comp can't do all of that.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
11/7/2012
"Forever is a long time,
On 07 Nov 2012, at 13:42, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Can anyone explain why geometry/topology would exist in a comp
universe?
The execution of the UD cab be shown to be emulated (in Turing sense)
by the arithmetical relation (even by the degree four diophantine
polynomial). This contains all
Hi CowBoy,
On 07 Nov 2012, at 15:55, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
As I read it, the Übermensch is the being that is aware of the
limits of Mensch ideology and values. Of course this can be hijacked
to support discrimination against groups, but only if you want to be
dishonest. But he emp
Hi Craig Weinberg
According to Kant, the fundamentals or primitives of spacetime objects
are the two fundamental (inextended) intuitions:
1) a sliver of time alone (showing when something happens)
and 2) a frame of space alone (showuing what happens).
If you join these primitives, then you get
On 11/7/2012 9:31 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Stephen P. King
Your criticism might be valid, but I never made the claim that Berkeley
is said to have made. Leibniz, possibly more like you,
would never have made such a claim. Leibniz believed that God
is purposeful (caused things to happen at leas
On 11/7/2012 9:38 AM, Hal Ruhl wrote:
Hi Everyone:
This may show up more than once as a few others did. In recent days I have
had issues with my internet connection. It has been 16 hours since I sent
this the second time. This time I tried sending it again and then again as
plain text. Very
On 07 Nov 2012, at 15:27, Richard Ruquist wrote:
So comp does not explain MWI, it just explains many dreams
It explain how the reality, both mental and physical, *emerge* from
the relative number dreams.
It predicts that any machine looking at her bowy below its
substitution level will
Hi Hal Ruhl
Consciousness = life = intelligence. These are an inseparable, subjective,
inextended properties of a living being.
In addition, intelligence requires free will of some degree in order to
make life-preserving choices for an associated, objective body,
such as are required for self
On 11/7/2012 9:41 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Arithmetic explains why they are observers and how and why they make
theories.
Dear Bruno,
This is a vacuous statement, IMHO. Absent the prior existence of
entities capable of counting there is no such thing as Arithmetic. Your
belief to the contrar
On 11/7/2012 9:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Nov 2012, at 17:05, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/6/2012 8:33 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
snip
This is not convincing as we can make statical interpretation of
actions. In physics this is traditionally done by adding one
dimension. The action o
Hi Platonist Guitar Cowboy
That fellow seemingly accepted all of Neitzche's views,
as you seem to.
I didn't say that one shouldn't endorse Nietzsche's views,
that's your business, not mine. I don't, but that's my prerogative.
I just just said that they are obviously incompatible with those o
Hi Stephen:
pAP1 is #8 of the discussion initiating posts
8) Conclusion (2): Once life is present it will immediately punch as many
holes in as many Energy Hang-up Barriers as the details of the particular
life entity involved allows - this is how it realizes its energy flow
conduit character.
On 11/7/2012 1:14 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
But it's hard to see what 1/pi of a duplicate would be.
I am not sure I understand what you mean. Where do you get 1/Pi from? What is
your point?
That QM predicts probabilities other than 1/2, 1/3, 2/3 and other simple fractions. So an
interpr
Hi Cowboy,
Without meaning to make any judgement, or mean any insult,
sociologically Nietzsche is representative of the far left.
Those people used to puzzle me (I am a conservative) since
they were essentially hostile to all authority, which of
course includes the establishment: religion, patriot
Hi Stephen P. King
That sounds like Leibniz. Each monad contains the
views of all of the other monads in order to see
the whole, not from just one perspective.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
11/7/2012
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
- Receiving the
Hi Roger,
You make me smile, without sarcasm. Usually he is accused of being too
right in "asserting will to power" and his views on "slave morality" are
usually used to justify this.
If you do read him, note that his bombastic style, physical and naturalist
metaphors and claims are where his ins
Hi Stephen P. King
The machine or program that made the calculation
doesn't have to be real, it's purely an a priori,
a given.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
11/7/2012
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From:
On 11/7/2012 10:13 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Yes, by new I mean contingent. But Kant, although his examples
are debatable, at least sought a synthetic a priori,
which of course would be a gold mine, or perhaps a stairway
to the divine.
Pragmatism rejects the idea of there being a
Hi Stephen P. King
Sounds reasonable.
Being a conservative, however, I tend to adopt orthodox views
such as that of Leibniz (to my mind at least) and the Bible.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
11/7/2012
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
- Receiving
Hi Roger Clough,
Hi Bruno Marchal
Yes, by new I mean contingent. But Kant, although his examples
are debatable, at least sought a synthetic a priori,
which of course would be a gold mine, or perhaps a stairway
to the divine.
Pragmatism rejects the idea of there being any
such universals, but
On 11/7/2012 10:21 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 07 Nov 2012, at 00:12, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/6/2012 11:01 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Stephen P. King
Even Berkeley had to admit that no forest, no whatever..
was foolishness and so said that in that case, God
observed it. Get real.
Hi R
Hi Platonist Guitar Cowboy
The far right and the far left have many things in common.
Or similar. The "occupy" folks are essentially anarchists, while
we conservatives, although not wanting to do away with govt entirely,
prefer to keep it small and less over-bearing.
And although adding another
Hi Bruno Marchal
Cool. Shows you how little I know.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
11/7/2012
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-11-07, 12:05:11
Sub
Hi Roger:
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Roger Clough
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 11:06 AM
To: everything-list
Subject: Consciousness = life = intelligence
Hi Hal Ruhl
Consciousness = life = intell
On 07 Nov 2012, at 15:44, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
I feel exactly as you do. I would never have Nietzsche's books burned,
there is much of value in them. Or at least some value.
His criticism of reason's being used by Christianity, for example,
parallels to
an appreciable extent
Hi Hal Ruhl
What is pAP1 ?
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
11/7/2012
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Hal Ruhl
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-11-07, 12:18:21
Subject: RE: Consciousness = lif
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 2:05 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
>> Physics is at the bottom of all non-mathematical things that have an
>> explanation, but we now know that some things have no explanation. We now
>> know that some things are random.
>>
>
>
> Here you accept there is inherent randomness.
>
Ye
On 07 Nov 2012, at 17:13, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/7/2012 9:41 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Arithmetic explains why they are observers and how and why they
make theories.
Dear Bruno,
This is a vacuous statement, IMHO. Absent the prior existence of
entities capable of counting there is no
Hi Bruno Marchal
A later Lutheran by the name of Kierkegaard said that God,
being infinite, is an absurdity to finite man's brain. Being an absurdity,
reason cannot apprehend God. K said instead that God
can only be experienced subjectively, and that that
experience of God was simply one of t
On 07 Nov 2012, at 17:16, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/7/2012 9:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Nov 2012, at 17:05, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/6/2012 8:33 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
snip
This is not convincing as we can make statical interpretation of
actions. In physics this is trad
Hi Stephen P. King
Glad to have a fellow enthusiast.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
11/7/2012
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Stephen P. King
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-11-07, 12:02:52
S
On 07 Nov 2012, at 18:12, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Cool. Shows you how little I know.
Those things are virtually unknown by most. Computer science is very
technical, and the number of publications is explosive, almost an
industry. It is also a gold mine, alas, most philosop
On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 10:49:04 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
>
> Hi Craig Weinberg
>
> I don't really know, but one starts with one point (a number ?)
>
then two points to form a line, then rotation of that line to form
> an angle and a plane as well. I don't see why comp can't do all o
On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 10:49:35 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On 07 Nov 2012, at 13:42, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
> > Can anyone explain why geometry/topology would exist in a comp
> > universe?
>
> The execution of the UD cab be shown to be emulated (in Turing sense)
> by th
On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 10:58:12 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
>
> Hi Craig Weinberg
>
> According to Kant, the fundamentals or primitives of spacetime objects
> are the two fundamental (inextended) intuitions:
>
> 1) a sliver of time alone (showing when something happens)
> and 2) a frame
On 11/7/2012 5:52 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
Again: we are still left without an explanation as to how the accidental coincidence
of a Platonic Truth and an actual fact of the world occurs.
Why do you write 'accidental'? Platonia is our invention to describe classes of facts by
abstractin
On 11/7/2012 7:53 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
How can you be in two places at once ?
Your soul, or 1p-you, cannot.
A viewpoint implies a certain place, but I don't see that one can only be conscious of one
place at a time. Consider the operator in Florida who is operating a drone over
Afghan
Hi Roger:
pAP1 [proposed Actual Purpose #1] is the life purpose I introduced in the
discussion initiating posts. See below. I recently posted giving acronyms.
AP is the actual purpose of life acronym.
8) Conclusion (2): Once life is present it will immediately punch as many
holes in as many Ene
On 11/7/2012 10:39 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 07 Nov 2012, at 13:48, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/5/2012 1:49 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
[SPK] You are considering only one entity.
This is incorrect. For example the first person plural is defined in
term of duplication of populations of mach
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 10:40 AM, meekerdb wrote:
> On 11/7/2012 1:14 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
>>
>> But it's hard to see what 1/pi of a duplicate would be.
>
>
> I am not sure I understand what you mean. Where do you get 1/Pi from? What
> is your point?
>
>
> That QM predicts probabilities other t
I was reacting to the last sentence "Their motions instead occur
according to a pre-established (a priori) harmony."
Not knowing specifically what you mean by "harmony", I assumed it
meant that the universe was being orchestrated by a supreme
"conductor". Whilst this view might be tenable in a cla
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:37 AM, John Clark wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 2:05 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
>
>>> >> Physics is at the bottom of all non-mathematical things that have an
>>> >> explanation, but we now know that some things have no explanation. We now
>>> >> know that some things are r
On 11/7/2012 10:24 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:19:03 AM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 11/7/2012 7:42 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> Can anyone explain why geometry/topology would exist in a comp
universe?
> --
Hi Craig,
So far it s
On 11/7/2012 11:40 AM, Hal Ruhl wrote:
Hi Stephen:
pAP1 is #8 of the discussion initiating posts
8) Conclusion (2): Once life is present it will immediately punch as many
holes in as many Energy Hang-up Barriers as the details of the particular
life entity involved allows - this is how it reali
On 11/7/2012 11:44 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Cowboy,
Without meaning to make any judgement, or mean any insult,
sociologically Nietzsche is representative of the far left.
Those people used to puzzle me (I am a conservative) since
they were essentially hostile to all authority, which of
course
On 11/7/2012 11:48 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Stephen P. King
That sounds like Leibniz. Each monad contains the
views of all of the other monads in order to see
the whole, not from just one perspective.
Hi Roger,
Yes, and that is why I like the idea of a Monad. I just don't agree
with Le
On 11/7/2012 11:55 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Stephen P. King
The machine or program that made the calculation
doesn't have to be real, it's purely an a priori,
a given.
Hi Roger,
Given how? How can a computation occur without access to something
real? Can we get knowledge for free?
On 11/7/2012 12:01 PM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Stephen P. King
Sounds reasonable.
Being a conservative, however, I tend to adopt orthodox views
such as that of Leibniz (to my mind at least) and the Bible.
Hi Roger,
I am weird. I tend libertarian, but not archarchist. I see
orthodoxy as O
On 11/7/2012 12:44 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 07 Nov 2012, at 17:13, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/7/2012 9:41 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Arithmetic explains why they are observers and how and why they make
theories.
Dear Bruno,
This is a vacuous statement, IMHO. Absent the prior existence of
On 11/7/2012 12:46 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 07 Nov 2012, at 17:16, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/7/2012 9:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Nov 2012, at 17:05, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/6/2012 8:33 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
snip
This is not convincing as we can make statical interpr
On 11/7/2012 1:19 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/7/2012 5:52 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
Again: we are still left without an explanation as to how the
accidental coincidence of a Platonic Truth and an actual fact of the
world occurs.
Why do you write 'accidental'? Platonia is our invention to desc
On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 6:50:03 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
>
> On 11/7/2012 10:24 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:19:03 AM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
>>
>> On 11/7/2012 7:42 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>> > Can anyone explain why geometry/
On 11/7/2012 8:18 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 6:50:03 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 11/7/2012 10:24 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:19:03 AM UTC-5, Stephen Paul
King wrote:
On 11/7/2012 7:42 AM, Craig Weinb
On 07 Nov 2012, at 19:04, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 10:49:35 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 07 Nov 2012, at 13:42, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> Can anyone explain why geometry/topology would exist in a comp
> universe?
The execution of the UD cab be shown to be emu
On 07 Nov 2012, at 19:25, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/7/2012 7:53 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
How can you be in two places at once ?
Your soul, or 1p-you, cannot.
A viewpoint implies a certain place, but I don't see that one can
only be conscious of one place at a time. Consider the operator i
85 matches
Mail list logo
