On 16 Jan 2013, at 17:23, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 14 Jan 2013, at 18:11, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Bruno Marchal
marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 13 Jan 2013, at 05:34, Richard Ruquist
On 16 Jan 2013, at 17:30, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 15 Jan 2013, at 16:24, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
What do you mean by quantum mind?
keep in
Descartes : “ I think, therefore I am “
Zen / Tibetan Buddhist monks : I think not, therefore I am
Why they say: ' Mind for others , no mind for me' ?
Are they fool men or maybe
they know that there are two methods of cognitions.
===..
Where does the information come from?
On 16 Jan 2013, at 17:30, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
I seem to have been using words sloppily. You can't get away with that
with a mathematician :-)
Let me try again.
The phenomenol is what appears to be out there.
OK, but it is not only that. In fact, with the exception of
On 16 Jan 2013, at 17:50, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
1) My awareness is nonphysical (because internal) yet exists in time.
I agree that the most common conscious state (awareness) exists in
relation with subjective time, but subjective time itself does not
exist in physical
On 16 Jan 2013, at 18:06, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
1) I was thinking of physical science, which cannot
know the meaning of things.
2) OK, I had overlooked the nonexistence in a mental
sense, or matter.
Well, matter exists in a mental sense. It just does not exist out
there.
On 17/01/2013, at 8:17 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree. Even Hamerov would agree, despite the low and quantum level. Only
Penrose, but probably also Searle, would disagree, I guess. Perhaps Craig,
and most believer in non comp.
We could ask one of the people who
On 16 Jan 2013, at 19:56, John Clark wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
I could study anthropology or I could study literature or I could
study history but I can't study theology because there is nothing
there to study. There is no field of
On 16 Jan 2013, at 20:29, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/16/2013 7:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 15 Jan 2013, at 23:18, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/15/2013 8:21 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 15 Jan 2013, at 07:54, meekerdb wrote, to Jason:
Consider the quantum suicide experiment, or the Shrodinger's
I'm agnostic about the environmental apocalipse. Producing useful
scientific theories about complex systems is already a daunting task. When
the issue is so heavily politicised by both sides, it becomes almost
impossible. Anyone that has ever done experimental research knows how easy
it is to lie
On 16 Jan 2013, at 23:45, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 1/16/2013 10:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 16 Jan 2013, at 13:13, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Specific properties, at least down here, are needed
if you accept Leibniz' dictum that identical entities cannot
exist in this
On 17 Jan 2013, at 00:18, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 1/16/2013 10:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 16 Jan 2013, at 00:11, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 1/15/2013 8:51 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 13 Jan 2013, at 20:14, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 1/13/2013 2:02 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/13/2013
On 17 Jan 2013, at 01:38, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/16/2013 3:54 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 1/16/2013 1:52 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/16/2013 1:45 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Now the same PR firms are hired by the oil and coal industry to
obfuscate the problem of global warming.
And
Hi all,
Naive question...
Not being a physicists, I only have a pop-science level of understanding of
the MWI. I imagine the multi-verse as a tree, where each time there is more
than one possible quantum state we get a branch. I imagine my consciousness
moving down the tree.
Suppose Mary
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 16 Jan 2013, at 17:30, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 15 Jan 2013, at 16:24, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Bruno Marchal
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 5:54 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 16 Jan 2013, at 17:23, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 14 Jan 2013, at 18:11, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Bruno
On 17 Jan 2013, at 13:32, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Hi all,
Naive question...
Not being a physicists, I only have a pop-science level of
understanding of the MWI. I imagine the multi-verse as a tree, where
each time there is more than one possible quantum state we get a
branch. I imagine my
2013/1/17 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
On 17 Jan 2013, at 13:32, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Hi all,
Naive question...
Not being a physicists, I only have a pop-science level of understanding
of the MWI. I imagine the multi-verse as a tree, where each time there is
more than one possible
On 17 Jan 2013, at 13:02, Telmo Menezes wrote:
I'm agnostic about the environmental apocalipse.
Me too.
Producing useful scientific theories about complex systems is
already a daunting task. When the issue is so heavily politicised by
both sides, it becomes almost impossible. Anyone
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 17 Jan 2013, at 13:32, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Hi all,
Naive question...
Not being a physicists, I only have a pop-science level of understanding
of the MWI. I imagine the multi-verse as a tree, where each time
Hi Bruno Marchal
The self-reference to phenomenol perception shows up
in the monad for an object, which is always from that
monad's pov.
The convolution operator is just a conjecture, since it
appears in systems theory and signal processing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convolution
In
Hi Bruno Marchal
1) To borrow from Dr. Johnson, matter exists out there because I can stub my
toe on it.
2) And I should have said that is necessary for the world to operate properly.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/17/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -
Perhaps a simpler version of the argument against duplicates
is that a substance is defined as a subject, possibly with a predicate or
predicates.
If two or more of these entities are the same, they are the same substance,
which converts a duplicate into a single entity. Hence one , no longer
As for what light is, keep in mind that we do know (with a very high
degree of assuredness) that light consists of quantum particles, and that
those particles move along geodesic paths through whatever medium they
encounter.
All that we know is what we infer from the instruments and materials
Hi Telmo Menezes
I think we will run out of fresh water and food before we run out of fossil
fuels.
The ocean floors are covered with frozen methyl hydrates, for example.
And there is an unlimited amount of nuclear power.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/17/2013
Forever is a
On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 6:31:51 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
1) Good point. So far, there is only indirect evidence of gravity waves.
http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=15438
2) Potential energy is more than conceptual, it is the elastic energy
stored
in rocks
On 17 Jan 2013, at 14:49, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
You are right.
But UDA shows that if comp is correct, and QM is correct, then
the second
has to be a mathematical consequence of the first.
Agreed, just as I put
Hi Stephen P. King
Ultimately the PEH.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/17/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Stephen P. King
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-16, 17:47:35
Subject: Re: MWI as
Hi Stephen P. King
1) Sorry, I incorrectly abbreviated, as usual, by referring to the Supreme
Monad as God.
The correct version is that God observes and handles the world of monads
from
behind or beyond the Supreme Monad. Somehow this may have led you
astray. I do believe that
On 17 Jan 2013, at 16:01, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 17 Jan 2013, at 13:32, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Hi all,
Naive question...
Not being a physicists, I only have a pop-science level of
understanding of the MWI. I
Hi Stephen P. King
Cool. Go for it.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/17/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Stephen P. King
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-16, 19:29:33
Subject:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Sorry, I'm missing your point. What is it ?
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/17/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Craig Weinberg
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-17,
Hi Stephen P. King
A monad is blind, and so does not know the location in space of
his physical body, so he must trust the PEH, which is his eyes and
his guiding spirit, to lead him on safe paths. Psalm 23.
In this Best of All Possible Worlds, there's no guarantees, but
being blind, what else
On Thursday, January 17, 2013 11:54:03 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Sorry, I'm missing your point. What is it ?
You said Potential energy is more than conceptual, so I am explaining why
I disagree. Potential energy is entirely conceptual, just like any other
potential,
Hi Roger,
On 17 Jan 2013, at 16:22, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
1) To borrow from Dr. Johnson, matter exists out there because I can
stub my toe on it.
I can stub my toe in a dream. I can dream 'stubbing my toe in a
reality'.
2) And I should have said that is necessary for
Hi Craig Weinberg
OK, I was just thinking in my old engineering frame of mind.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/17/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Craig Weinberg
Receiver: everything-list
Time:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 7:06:03 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 1/16/2013 5:32 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
That is the most clear demosnstration that what we perceive is in the
mind ,and the rest out of the mind is only mathematics (or some kind
of underlying
I hope you're enjoying your check from Exxon/Mobil.
Brent
On 1/17/2013 2:57 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
Count me as an heretic denialist of the ecological Apocalipsis. The Michael Mann hockey
stick is a fraud as you can verify in the mails leaked in the Climate Research Unit. You
must read
On 1/17/2013 7:16 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 16 Jan 2013, at 23:45, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 1/16/2013 10:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 16 Jan 2013, at 13:13, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Specific properties, at least down here, are needed
if you accept Leibniz' dictum that
On 1/17/2013 9:14 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Coming back to hemp should be the good idea. Oil and wood have
replaced Hemp (for textile, fuel, paper and medication) just from lies
and greed. The possible global warming might just be another
consequences on the lies on cannabis, drugs etc. Hemp
2013/1/17 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
I hope you're enjoying your check from Exxon/Mobil.
I don`t find irony in your words, given the context of your previous
answers.
I can´t believe that you are no naive as to assume that warmism scepticism
is a conspiracy.
My worst suppositions about
On 1/17/2013 11:46 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Stephen P. King
1) Sorry, I incorrectly abbreviated, as usual, by referring to the Supreme
Monad as God.
The correct version is that God observes and handles the world of monads
from
behind or beyond the Supreme Monad. Somehow this may
On 1/17/2013 4:02 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
I'm agnostic about the environmental apocalipse. Producing useful scientific theories
about complex systems is already a daunting task. When the issue is so heavily
politicised by both sides, it becomes almost impossible. Anyone that has ever done
The idea of the end of resources comes from Malthus, but it can be traced
much back in time, to some misconceptions of what is a resource from our
evolutionary past. It is though naturally that a resource is something
produced by the heart, which is not in the hand of the man to fabricate it.
This
On 1/17/2013 4:32 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Hi all,
Naive question...
Not being a physicists, I only have a pop-science level of understanding of the MWI. I
imagine the multi-verse as a tree, where each time there is more than one possible
quantum state we get a branch. I imagine my
On 1/17/2013 1:54 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
The idea of the end of resources comes from Malthus, but it can be
traced much back in time, to some misconceptions of what is a resource
from our evolutionary past. It is though naturally that a resource is
something produced by the heart, which
On 1/17/2013 6:59 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Holy Smokes ! Automobile exhausts are causing polar ice caps to also melt on
Mars, Jupiter and Pluto
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-on-mars.htm
What the site actually says is, At this time, there is little empirical evidence that
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 7:49 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 1/17/2013 4:02 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
I'm agnostic about the environmental apocalipse. Producing useful
scientific theories about complex systems is already a daunting task. When
the issue is so heavily politicised
From just the abstract alone, I can't see how this differs from the
Solomonff universal prior?
Cheers
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 07:29:33PM -0500, Stephen P. King wrote:
Dear Bruno and Friends,
The paper that I have been waiting a long time for. ;-)
http://arxiv.org/abs/1010.2067
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 1:08 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
The short answer is yes. But it's not four universes, it's one universe
that is a superposition of four states. The idealization is that the cats
are isolated so that it is only when a live/dead measurement is made the
On Thursday, January 17, 2013 6:46:59 AM UTC-5, stathisp wrote:
On 17/01/2013, at 8:17 AM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
I agree. Even Hamerov would agree, despite the low and quantum level. Only
Penrose, but probably also Searle, would disagree, I guess. Perhaps
Hi John,
My suspicion is that Roger is so keen to impose a Piercean triadic
view on things that he has omitted to make the necessary connection
with the normal meaning of 1p/3p as standing for subjective/objective.
Cheers
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 04:55:17PM -0500, John Mikes wrote:
Russell,
I
I particularly liked this statement by Baez which relates to Feynman
renomalization for QED and Crammer's Transactioanal Analysis:
Manin and Marcolli [20] derived similar results in a broader context and
studied phase transitions in those systems. Manin [18, 19] also outlined an
ambitious program
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 6:04 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net
socra...@bezeqint.net wrote:
Descartes : “ I think, therefore I am “
Zen / Tibetan Buddhist monks : I think not, therefore I am
Why they say: ' Mind for others , no mind for me' ?
Are they fool men or maybe
they know that there are
On 1/17/2013 4:21 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
From just the abstract alone, I can't see how this differs from the
Solomonff universal prior?
Hi Russell,
OK, is that a good thing? It seems to me that it is. Are you saying
that the content of the paper is trivial?
Cheers
On Wed, Jan
On 1/17/2013 9:25 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 1/17/2013 4:21 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
From just the abstract alone, I can't see how this differs from the
Solomonff universal prior?
Hi Russell,
OK, is that a good thing? It seems to me that it is. Are you
saying that the content of
On 1/17/2013 4:31 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
You have to prove that the CO2 is the main ingredient of global
warming. Not me.
But it is not. It is water vapor by orders of magnitude. And the
water vapor concentration, and the clouds depends on cosmic rays, and
cosmic rays depend on solar
On 1/17/2013 7:10 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote:
I particularly liked this statement by Baez which relates to Feynman
renomalization for QED and Crammer's Transactioanal Analysis:
Manin and Marcolli [20] derived similar results in a broader context and
studied phase transitions in those systems.
On 1/17/2013 7:28 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Alberto G. Corona
agocor...@gmail.com mailto:agocor...@gmail.com wrote:
You have to prove that the CO2 is the main ingredient of global
warming. Not me.
Ok. So Greenhouse effect is alarmist
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 09:25:20PM -0500, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 1/17/2013 4:21 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
From just the abstract alone, I can't see how this differs from the
Solomonff universal prior?
Hi Russell,
OK, is that a good thing? It seems to me that it is. Are you
On 1/17/2013 11:34 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 09:25:20PM -0500, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 1/17/2013 4:21 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
From just the abstract alone, I can't see how this differs from the
Solomonff universal prior?
Hi Russell,
OK, is that a good
On 1/17/2013 6:48 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 1/17/2013 7:10 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote:
I particularly liked this statement by Baez which relates to Feynman
renomalization for QED and Crammer's Transactioanal Analysis:
Manin and Marcolli [20] derived similar results in a broader context and
On 1/17/2013 7:11 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 1/17/2013 7:28 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com
mailto:agocor...@gmail.com wrote:
You have to prove that the CO2 is the main ingredient of global warming.
Not me.
On 1/18/2013 12:48 AM, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/17/2013 7:11 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 1/17/2013 7:28 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Alberto G. Corona
agocor...@gmail.com mailto:agocor...@gmail.com wrote:
You have to prove that the CO2 is the main
64 matches
Mail list logo
