On 6/30/2014 9:35 PM, LizR wrote:
ISTM...
In primitive materialism, what exists are space / time and matter / energy. Information
is an emergent property of the arrangements of those things, like entropy. Neither of
these exist at the level of fundamental particles, or Planck cells, or
On 1 July 2014 17:59, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 6/30/2014 9:35 PM, LizR wrote:
ISTM...
In primitive materialism, what exists are space / time and matter /
energy. Information is an emergent property of the arrangements of those
things, like entropy. Neither of these exist
On 1 July 2014 17:38, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 6/30/2014 9:03 PM, LizR wrote:
Well, that's quite straightforward. Brent is assuming the (so called)
Aristotelean paradigm, and hence that his mother *is* her brain.
I'm assuming (on some evidence) that she, her stream of
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Samiya Illias
Chris,
I could respond in many ways, but none seems adequate.
Samiya – matters of this nature are never easy to discuss… so no worries.
I could say that I believe
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 12:49 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't see how the university can stop the student union from banning
things if they want to,
I guess, assuming the student union owns the buildings in which such bans
apply.
but then I can't see how the SU can stop students
yes, Guitar, I understood the sarcasm, but it was sarcasm with a good point. It
has meaning for me, not only for the topics on the mailing list, but my own, up
from liberalism thing, which I used to be. Once one knows ones goals, then the
path needs no ideology, merely, a search for the best
Do you see the average citizen wanting fission power nowadays? It seems cheaper
and quicker to go with sun and wind for electricity, once the storage issue is
put in the rear view mirror.
Actually there is no such evidence except when the exposure is huge. I'll have
a lot more to say about
Some recent discussions have centred on the (putative) features of
hierarchical-reductionist ontologies, and whether comp (whatever its
intrinsic merits or deficiencies) should be considered as just another
candidate theory in that category, This prompts me to consider what
fundamental question a
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 1:32 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
yes, Guitar, I understood the sarcasm, but it was sarcasm with a good
point.
It was just me playing chickenhawk. You can read too much into it, if you
like though.
It has meaning for me,
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy
multiplecit...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 5:03 AM, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 1:31 AM,
What is your definition of factual accuracy? Kindly explain with some examples.
Samiya
On 01-Jul-2014, at 5:46 pm, Platonist Guitar Cowboy
multiplecit...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at
On 01-Jul-2014, at 1:15 pm, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Samiya Illias
Chris,
I could respond in many ways, but none seems
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 8:20 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
a LFTR does make U233, and more that it needs to keep functioning by
about 8%.
That depends on how the LFTR is designed and operated, if done correctly
the figure is close to zero, just enough U233 to keep it going but no
Why has the nuclear sector stayed away from LFTR and favored the
current type of reactor design?
One word - bombs.
That's one of the reasons but there are others. Companies like GE and
Westinghouse have no reason to be interested in a LFTR, they don't make
reactors anymore (few people
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 8:50 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
In fact most deaths due to radiation accidents come from mishandling or
misusing medical radioisotopes. Here's a list of all fatalities from
radiation accidents. [...]
And here is a list of some other energy related
On 30 Jun 2014, at 07:02, meekerdb wrote:
On 6/29/2014 7:33 PM, LizR wrote:
On 30 June 2014 04:43, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 9:44 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
agnosticism is of course the defining principle of the scientific
method, so we really
On 30 Jun 2014, at 07:41, meekerdb wrote:
On 6/29/2014 10:20 PM, LizR wrote:
On 30 June 2014 17:02, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 6/29/2014 7:33 PM, LizR wrote:
On 30 June 2014 04:43, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 9:44 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com
On 7/1/2014 1:01 AM, LizR wrote:
On 1 July 2014 17:59, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 6/30/2014 9:35 PM, LizR wrote:
ISTM...
In primitive materialism, what exists are space / time and matter / energy.
Information is an emergent property of
On 30 Jun 2014, at 20:53, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
Thinking that atheism could be bad, is like believing that red hair
is a sign of the devil.
The problem of atheism, is that it is
- either scientifically trivial (santa klaus does not exist),
- or a religion in disguise (a
On 01 Jul 2014, at 02:50, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 1 July 2014 03:14, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 30 Jun 2014, at 02:14, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 26 June 2014 12:03, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 25 June 2014 16:52, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On
On 7/1/2014 1:09 AM, LizR wrote:
On 1 July 2014 17:38, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 6/30/2014 9:03 PM, LizR wrote:
Well, that's quite straightforward. Brent is assuming the (so called)
Aristotelean
paradigm, and hence that his mother /is/
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Why in hell do we keep talking about ancient ignoramuses like Plotinus
and the worst physicist who ever lived, Aristotle?
Aristotle was a brilliant physicist.
WHAT?!
Indeed, his word initiates physics.
If
On 7/1/2014 4:36 AM, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
Do you see the average citizen wanting fission power nowadays? It seems cheaper and
quicker to go with sun and wind for electricity, once the storage issue is put in the
rear view mirror.
Actually there is no such evidence except
On 7/1/2014 5:00 AM, David Nyman wrote:
Some recent discussions have centred on the (putative) features of
hierarchical-reductionist ontologies, and whether comp (whatever its
intrinsic merits or deficiencies) should be considered as just another
candidate theory in that category, This prompts
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com
wrote:
What is your definition of factual accuracy? Kindly explain with some
examples.
You posted on this list bringing up factual accuracy regarding the Quran,
if I remember correctly. This is why I posed the question in a
On 01 Jul 2014, at 06:35, LizR wrote:
ISTM...
In primitive materialism, what exists are space / time and matter /
energy. Information is an emergent property of the arrangements of
those things, like entropy. Neither of these exist at the level of
fundamental particles, or Planck cells,
On 01 Jul 2014, at 07:59, meekerdb wrote:
On 6/30/2014 9:35 PM, LizR wrote:
ISTM...
In primitive materialism, what exists are space / time and matter /
energy. Information is an emergent property of the arrangements of
those things, like entropy. Neither of these exist at the level of
On 7/1/2014 9:17 AM, John Clark wrote:
Why has the nuclear sector stayed away from LFTR and favored the
current
type of reactor design?
One word - bombs.
That's one of the reasons but there are others. Companies like GE and Westinghouse have
no reason to be
On 7/1/2014 9:33 AM, John Clark wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 8:50 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
In fact most deaths due to radiation accidents come from mishandling or
misusing
medical radioisotopes. Here's a list of all fatalities from
On 7/1/2014 9:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
But you don't have to prove something doesn't exist to reasonably fail to believe that
it does. I don't have proof that there is no teapot orbiting Jupiter, but that doesn't
make me epitemologically irresponsible to assert I don't believe there is one.
On 7/1/2014 10:22 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 30 Jun 2014, at 07:41, meekerdb wrote:
On 6/29/2014 10:20 PM, LizR wrote:
On 30 June 2014 17:02, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 6/29/2014 7:33 PM, LizR wrote:
On 30 June 2014 04:43, John Clark
On 7/1/2014 12:04 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
In a way, all of fundamental physics posits information theoretic entities.
Particles are nothing more than what satisfies particle equations. Bruno complains
about Aristotle and primitive matter, but I don't know any physicists who go around
Hi Russell,
Ah! I don't quite grok it completely, but thank you for this example. We
had to assume an already existing measure on the Reals. Where does that
come from?
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au
wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 08:32:37PM -0400,
On 1 July 2014 19:24, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
I think you have created a strawman exhaustively-reducible physical or
material ontology. Sure, physicists take forces and matter as working
assumptions - but they don't say what they are. They are never anything
other than elements
On 7/1/2014 1:32 PM, David Nyman wrote:
On 1 July 2014 19:24, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
I think you have created a strawman exhaustively-reducible physical or
material ontology. Sure, physicists take forces and matter as working
assumptions - but they don't say what they are. They
On 2 July 2014 06:24, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
Although I think comp is an interesting theory and worthy of study, I
think I look at it differently than Bruno. I look at it as just another
mathematical model, one whose ontology happens to be computations. I think
Bruno assumes
On 2 July 2014 09:33, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 7/1/2014 1:32 PM, David Nyman wrote:
On 1 July 2014 19:24, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
I think you have created a strawman exhaustively-reducible physical or
material ontology. Sure, physicists take forces and matter
On 7/1/2014 2:55 PM, LizR wrote:
On 2 July 2014 09:33, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 7/1/2014 1:32 PM, David Nyman wrote:
On 1 July 2014 19:24, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
I think you
On 2 July 2014 10:16, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 7/1/2014 2:55 PM, LizR wrote:
I agree. As Victor Stenger mentions in The Comprehensible Cosmos
causality is just another word for the 2nd law, and the 2nd law is an
emergent result of the universe being in a special state -
On 1 July 2014 23:05, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 12:49 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't see how the university can stop the student union from banning
things if they want to,
I guess, assuming the student union owns the buildings in which
On 7/1/2014 3:43 PM, LizR wrote:
On 2 July 2014 10:16, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 7/1/2014 2:55 PM, LizR wrote:
I agree. As Victor Stenger mentions in The Comprehensible Cosmos
causality is
just another word for the 2nd law, and the 2nd
SMad will likely not work with say, an Iranian guv mint, but it worked ok with
the Sovs. You fear a Pyrrhic victory, I fear capitulation.
honestly see the connection with my comment. MAD is posturing, the end result
of which is NOT to have a war. But the original question was IF we had a war,
Of course not Chris!
Are you trying to be witty perchance?
-Original Message-
From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, Jun 30, 2014 11:57 am
Subject: RE: American Intelligence
It worked for the Nazis, it may be working for the Jihadists, and the longing
to be led has been a feature of the Sovs, Mao, Kims, and Kampuchea. To say
otherwise is to be a-historical as in, false.
OK, so you agree with me that it isn't just a Left thing as you said it was
earlier, which is
What about the newest guy? Reminds me of Jon Pertwee, minus the fluff heads.
But anyone married to an actor from Doctor Who is good in my book (well,
apart from David Tennant...)
-Original Message-
From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com
To: everything-list
You might as well dismiss these guys as there is probably zero worth doing now.
However the now has gases and anthrax so we'll see what they will do if
anything. I am betting they will.
This boogie monster, this Caliphate you brandish about as if it should somehow
inspire chills and shivers
From: spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com
SMad will likely not work with say, an Iranian guv mint, but it worked ok with
the Sovs. You fear a Pyrrhic victory, I fear capitulation.
That is bullshit -- couch potato general man --
From: spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 1, 2014 4:11 PM
Subject: Re: American Intelligence
Of course not Chris!
Then you must surely be on the lookout for those black
From: spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 1, 2014 4:20 PM
Subject: Re: American Intelligence
You might as well dismiss these guys as there is probably zero worth doing
On 1 July 2014 22:33, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
The point, again in principle at least, is that nothing *above*
the level of the basic ontology need be taken into account in the
evolution of states defined in terms of it; put simply, there is no
top-down causality.
Actually,
On 7/1/2014 4:42 PM, David Nyman wrote:
On 1 July 2014 22:33, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
The point, again in principle at least, is that nothing *above*
the level of the basic ontology need be taken into account in the
evolution of states defined in terms of it; put simply, there is
On 2 July 2014 10:57, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 7/1/2014 3:43 PM, LizR wrote:
My question is: Does Eternal Inflation make expansion the result of
fundamental physics? E.I. appears to be time asymmetric
It's not asymmetric. In the Carroll-Chen model universes have a minimal
Dear Bruno,
Hear Hear! Well said!
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 30 Jun 2014, at 07:41, meekerdb wrote:
On 6/29/2014 10:20 PM, LizR wrote:
On 30 June 2014 17:02, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 6/29/2014 7:33 PM, LizR wrote:
On
On 2 July 2014 11:09, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
SMad will likely not work with say, an Iranian guv mint, but it worked ok
with the Sovs. You fear a Pyrrhic victory, I fear capitulation.
Yes, MAD wouldn't work with a nation of suicide bombers, for
Now I see why I am unable to answer you. Thanks for explaining!
So, in principle, you are against any claims of factual accuracy from any
person or religion, and therefore prejudiced against all scriptures? Given
that I am convinced about the Quran being the truth from God, and you
convinced that
On 2 July 2014 05:33, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 7/1/2014 1:01 AM, LizR wrote:
On 1 July 2014 17:59, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 6/30/2014 9:35 PM, LizR wrote:
ISTM...
In primitive materialism, what exists are space / time and matter /
energy. Information
On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 3:34 AM, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com
wrote:
Now I see why I am unable to answer you. Thanks for explaining!
So, in principle, you are against any claims of factual accuracy from any
person or religion, and therefore prejudiced against all scriptures?
That
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Samiya Illias
Now I see why I am unable to answer you. Thanks for explaining!
So, in principle, you are against any claims of factual accuracy from any
person or religion, and therefore
On 2 July 2014 05:44, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 7/1/2014 1:09 AM, LizR wrote:
On 1 July 2014 17:38, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 6/30/2014 9:03 PM, LizR wrote:
Well, that's quite straightforward. Brent is assuming the (so called)
Aristotelean paradigm, and
On 2 July 2014 04:17, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
Why has the nuclear sector stayed away from LFTR and favored the
current type of reactor design?
One word - bombs.
That's one of the reasons but there are others. Companies like GE and
Westinghouse have no reason to be
On 7/1/2014 6:52 PM, LizR wrote:
On 2 July 2014 05:33, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 7/1/2014 1:01 AM, LizR wrote:
On 1 July 2014 17:59, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 6/30/2014 9:35 PM, LizR
On 02-Jul-2014, at 7:44 am, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Samiya Illias
Now I see why I am unable to answer you. Thanks for
On 02-Jul-2014, at 7:31 am, Platonist Guitar Cowboy
multiplecit...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 3:34 AM, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com wrote:
Now I see why I am unable to answer you. Thanks for explaining!
So, in principle, you are against any claims of factual
Just a thought. If I was god, and I was in communication with the puny
beings I had created, given free will, threatened with eternal damnation
but then said they had a chance at salvation as long as they lick my
metaphorical boots with regular prayers and so on, which I think is a
perfectly
On 2 July 2014 15:46, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 7/1/2014 6:52 PM, LizR wrote:
Interesting. How is the energy required to erase a single bit
reducible to statistical mechanics?
Erasing a bit means putting it in a known state, which is a decrease in
entropy.
I don't get
On 2 July 2014 15:46, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
OK, so how does that work? Like I said, I don't understand it.
Intuitively, saying that A causes B and B causes A doesn't appear to make
sense,
It's not a causal relationship, it's an explanatory -.
Sorry I should have said
On 2 July 2014 15:46, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
What would a non-reductionist ontology look like?
The explanatory chain you gave earlier would look like one if I could make
sense of it.
Some kind of Holism. Plotinus talks about The One, but what good is
that. If you stop taking
On 7/1/2014 9:40 PM, LizR wrote:
On 2 July 2014 15:46, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 7/1/2014 6:52 PM, LizR wrote:
Interesting. How is the energy required to erase a single bit reducible
to
statistical mechanics?
Erasing a bit
On 7/1/2014 9:42 PM, LizR wrote:
On 2 July 2014 15:46, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
OK, so how does that work? Like I said, I don't understand it. Intuitively,
saying
that A causes B and B causes A doesn't appear to make sense,
It's not a
On 7/1/2014 9:47 PM, LizR wrote:
On 2 July 2014 15:46, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
What would a non-reductionist ontology look like?
The explanatory chain you gave earlier would look like one if I could make
sense of it.
Some kind of Holism.
70 matches
Mail list logo
