RE: Digest for everything-list@googlegroups.com - 6 Messages in 2 Topics
Fred Hoyle suggested the idea of quantum suicide for a civilisation in “October the 1st is too late” written around 1964 I think. That’s the first occurrence I know of it. Thank you. I just read it. I am now more convinced than ever that I have the right idea. I've figured out the links between the Platonic world of ideas, the physical world, and the mental world. I can explain the reason for the flow of time. I can explain the story of Jesus. I can explain the real significance of the Holy Trinity. I can explain it all. And you can believe me or not. I don't care. There are always, always, two explanations to get the truth of reality to anybody. And they are both perfectly rational and logical. And one is always easy, and one is always hard. One is based on faith, and one is based on evidence. If you understand it, then you will understand that the one based on evidence is so damn complicated that it just isn't worth your time to write it down. You need a high-bandwidth face-to-face communications channel to convince anybody. Because it's just too damn much work otherwise. And you will understand why that is. And the only other argument, the one based on faith, is this: I'm God, and I can prove it, but you have to talk to me face to face and be willing to listen to me to understand the proof. And even then I might not be able to prove it to you. But it will certainly be an interesting conversation. You're God too, you just don't know it yet. You will. God's an inexorable clockwork machine of love and understanding. In a sense. The purpose of your life is to find out what it means to be human. In the literal and figurative sense. -- Mark Buda her...@acm.org I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
RE: Digest for everything-list@googlegroups.com - 6 Messages in 2 Topics
Fred Hoyle suggested the idea of quantum suicide for a civilisation in “October the 1st is too late” written around 1964 I think. That’s the first occurrence I know of it. I just read it. I meant, I just read part of it. I googled it and found a PDF file and read that, mistaking it for a short story. Okay, I didn't actually read all of it. But the part I read shows me that Fred Hoyle had some pieces of the answer too. The Fred Hoyle that found all the pieces lived forever. The Fred Hoyle in our past is a bad copy of the original. Everybody you think has lived and died on this planet has found their own personal paradise in their own subjective reality in a different branch of the universe, and I have figured out how it works. -- Mark Buda her...@acm.org I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide
On 16 Jul 2010, at 14:13, Mark Buda wrote: But the upshot of it is this: I have found out what happens when you commit quantum suicide. You discover that you believe a contradiction, and that even though nothing about the world has changed, you understand the universe. That seems very weird. The whole universe is very weird. Quantum mechanics is weird. Another way to say what I'm trying to says is that you *can't* commit quantum suicide, because if you try, something will prevent you. Remember that guy on the list who claimed to have planned to do it, but stopped because he fell in love? I know why that happened. That's how it works. That's part of the plan. You're supposed to fall in love and have children. The universe works out that way. But you have a hard time explaining it. Because you discover that you are, in Bruno's terms, a Lobian machine interviewing itself for the laws of physics. But I am saying this to explain that we can use reason to understand where the laws of physics come from. Not to mystified people with a lack of explanation. Bruno, I think the misunderstanding here is that you're thinking that there's one set of laws of physics. And there isn't. There are no laws. Reality is bound by rules, but the laws of physics aren't the real rules. It just looks that way if you take the evidence-based approach to figuring it out. If you take the faith-based approach to figuring it out, you find God. It doesn't matter which way you go, it's circular, and you get to choose. They're right and wrong, and I understand why, but I can't explain it, and Bruno understands why. I guess I have been unclear at some point. I am just a poor scientist trying to be honest with myself and the others. Then there's something I'm assuming you understand that you don't in fact understand. If we talked I could probably figure out what it was. Why do you want to convince Richard Dawkins? You give him credit. Because I know that I know how to persuade him of the truth based on evidence *and* emotion. I can prove to him, personally, that I am God, and that I created the universe. And he will believe it. Because I can show him a causal loop between the mental world, the physical world, and the ficional world that explains both intelligent design *and* evolution. I can show him how man's sense of humor and laughter evolved, and how they're related to the causal loop. I can show him how love and the idea of God evolved, and how they're related to the causal loop. I can show him that Jesus was a real person, and was really God, and that the Catholic Church he despises is just a bad copy of the real thing, and I can show him how to fix it. And I can show the church how to fix it. But I have to do it one day at a time, and I have to do it by *talking* to people, or it's not worth my effort, because I have my own personal problems, and I can show how *they* are related to all this. And I can explain how Hari Seldon's psychohistory worked in Isaac Asimov's Foundation trilogy, because I have figured the whole damn thing out. What it all boils down to, guys, is that the reason marriage counseling works is that when two people love each other but can't live together they need a neutral third party to mediate because they can't understand each other's arguments. I understand Richard Dawkins and the Catholic Church well enough to get them talking, if they'll listen to me. I don't know how to get their attention without ruining my marriage. I'm trapped in God's logic trap. I've done my best to talk to the Church - I have spent a couple of hours with a priest, and he seems interested, but I can't figure out how to get him to do anything helpful. Is anybody willing to help me? I need help to get this done. I know the help will come one way or another, but I'm asking the members of the list: does anybody understand me or want to help me? -- Mark Buda her...@acm.org I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
RE: Fred Hoyle's story
No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3011 - Release Date: 07/17/10 02:35:00
RE: Fred Hoyle's story
A question: does it make any sense that one goes to live in a personal paradise in their own subjective reality in a different branch of the universe only after death? Would it not make sense that we are always in the state of existing in a subjective reality in some branch of the universe? How is this not solipsism? None of it makes any sense because it's a paradox. Reality is impossible. You can understand it, but it can't all make sense to you at once. I once remarked that half of all marriages end in divorce, but that isn't so bad when you consider the other half end in death. I realize now that there are two more alternatives: apotheosis and oblivion. I'm in an impossible situation right now, a love triangle of sorts, and if all my ideas are correct it will end with all three of us spending eternity together, even if the whole of reality gets turned inside out in the process. From my perspective, that is. And I am determined to obtain that outcome. However, from your perspective, one of four things will appear to happen: (1) I get a divorce. But the me you see isn't the subjective me talking to you now. It is, from my subjective perspective, a philosophical zombie. (2) My wife or I die. But the me you see in this case is, as in case (1), a philosiphical zombie from my perspective. (3) You completely forget about me. (That's the oblivion alternative, from the outside, which corresponds from my point of view to traveling backwards in time, which impossible for me.) (4) You realize that I am God, but God doesn't mean what you thought it meant. After you realize that I am God, if you want to be God, you'll have to leave me, by appearing to die, or by my forgetting you. Otherwise, you'll still share my subjective reality if we interact, and there will only be room for three Gods - the Holy Trinity - and you won't be one of them, unless I change my mind. I realize this makes no fucking sense. It's insanely complicated. That's why I can't figure all of it out by myself, and that's why I don't have to. I'm pretty certain that I can find clues to string theory in coincidences in the Mayan calendar and my genealogy and family relationships, if I have the time to work on it. I'm willing to be dissuaded by facts. I'm willing to listen to reason. I'm willing to leave the list if people ask me to shut up. I won't hang around where I'm not welcome. But seriously, I can't figure out where I've made a mistake. -- Mark Buda her...@acm.org I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Fred Hoyle's story
Well maybe going to see a psychiatrist will help you figure out what's wrong with you... In the meantime if what you write is not bullshit, don't arm anyone. Quentin 2010/7/17 Mark Buda her...@acm.org A question: does it make any sense that one goes to live in a personal paradise in their own subjective reality in a different branch of the universe only after death? Would it not make sense that we are always in the state of existing in a subjective reality in some branch of the universe? How is this not solipsism? None of it makes any sense because it's a paradox. Reality is impossible. You can understand it, but it can't all make sense to you at once. I once remarked that half of all marriages end in divorce, but that isn't so bad when you consider the other half end in death. I realize now that there are two more alternatives: apotheosis and oblivion. I'm in an impossible situation right now, a love triangle of sorts, and if all my ideas are correct it will end with all three of us spending eternity together, even if the whole of reality gets turned inside out in the process. From my perspective, that is. And I am determined to obtain that outcome. However, from your perspective, one of four things will appear to happen: (1) I get a divorce. But the me you see isn't the subjective me talking to you now. It is, from my subjective perspective, a philosophical zombie. (2) My wife or I die. But the me you see in this case is, as in case (1), a philosiphical zombie from my perspective. (3) You completely forget about me. (That's the oblivion alternative, from the outside, which corresponds from my point of view to traveling backwards in time, which impossible for me.) (4) You realize that I am God, but God doesn't mean what you thought it meant. After you realize that I am God, if you want to be God, you'll have to leave me, by appearing to die, or by my forgetting you. Otherwise, you'll still share my subjective reality if we interact, and there will only be room for three Gods - the Holy Trinity - and you won't be one of them, unless I change my mind. I realize this makes no fucking sense. It's insanely complicated. That's why I can't figure all of it out by myself, and that's why I don't have to. I'm pretty certain that I can find clues to string theory in coincidences in the Mayan calendar and my genealogy and family relationships, if I have the time to work on it. I'm willing to be dissuaded by facts. I'm willing to listen to reason. I'm willing to leave the list if people ask me to shut up. I won't hang around where I'm not welcome. But seriously, I can't figure out where I've made a mistake. -- Mark Buda her...@acm.org I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comeverything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Fred Hoyle's story
On 17 Jul 2010, at 19:30, Mark Buda wrote: But seriously, I can't figure out where I've made a mistake. You talk like if you know the truth. This is not the game favorized by most people of the list, I think. The game here is science, or as close as possible (which is the very essence of science). That means that we attempt to put all the carts on the table, agree to admit some starting propositions, and some ways of reasoning, and then derived propositions from that, and compared those propositions with observation. The starting propositions are called hypothesis, and strictly speaking we remains aware that they may be false. They are always hypothesis, be it F = ma, E = mc^2, Ephi = e phi, or even '0 ≠ s(x) for all x natural numbers'. We put the carts on the table and we discuss with those who agree with them, deducing facts; and confronting them, publicly with the third person sharable observations, and privately with the non sharable one. Here a difficulty is that we theorize in a field which contains terms concerning non sharable knowledge, like the term qualia, for example. This makes the subject difficult and delicate, but then guess what: We are lucky to live a rather wonderful discovery, which is the discovery of the universal machine (a mathematical discovery) preceded by a deep results concerning vast class of self-referential extensions of those machines, and the discovery, mainly made by people like Gödel, and Löb, leading to a completely axiomatizable, at some key level of complexity, of the logic of self-reference, making it possible to search an agreement on some definitions, or modelization tools, and make the *question*, mainly the mind-body problem, or the consciousness-reality problem amenable to a mathematical formulation (in the frame of that hypothesis). And I appreciate to share some modest findings, admittedly shocking from an Aristotelian conception of reality wnating to keep mechanism. Forgetting the greeks, it may be the originality of my work: to be serious on the subject. Digital mechanism gives pretty much light through computer science and number theory. I am just searching my key near the réverbère, pal. You may be interested to compare your findings with the discourse of the universal machine which introspects itself. Some of your comments, some of which notably attributes me beliefs that I haven't, but also like truth which have the incommunicable status, (unless you are not turing emulable), makes me think you have not really read my work with enough attention, I'm afraid. You may give a different theory (of everything), assuming or using in some ways principles some can agree with. The list is open to many theories, but most people here seems to agree that they are turing emulable at some level, and from that we can already say a lot, even on what cannot be said. But coming here by talking like if you have found the truth is very naïve, and then mentioning 2012, and coincidences makes some of us fearing for your mental health. I have a dear friend whose fatal mental illness begun by collecting coincidences. All universal machine already knows that, as far as their are correct/ honest/sane, they can both find truth by introspecting themselves, or looking inwards, but also knows that most of them, if not all, can only be found in that only way (introspection), and they know that communicating them can only lead to the contrary of what was naively intended in the proposition (preventing other machine to pursue correctly the inward looking). But NOT ONE universal machine knows that she is correct/honest/sane, unless she is incorrect/dishonest/ insane. The public doubt remains, and has to remain. For correct universal machine it is a sort of divine politeness (in Plotinus terms). I am serious about your powering coincidences problem. There are coincidences, but if you weight them you can argue on the dangerosity of cannabis, and develop all myths. It is rethorical sophistic technic to manipulate people, and fear sellers exceeds at that. If you continue to weight the coincidences, well, keep your findings for you, or go in 2012 Forum, there are many, or eventually consult. And to be sure not to be misunderstood by the others, I tell them, to not reject everything concerning the 2012 idea. For example I could argue that, in all its naivety, the following 2012 videos describes rather well some occurring universal phenomena: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYAMPA6AgZ4NR=1 (please take nothing literally here) But then I may argue that 2012 has already happened, at least in mathematics, through the discovery of the universal machine(s). There are many 2012. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email
Re: Fred Hoyle's story
On 7/17/2010 2:30 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 17 Jul 2010, at 19:30, Mark Buda wrote: But seriously, I can't figure out where I've made a mistake. It may come to be known as Buda's last theorem. He discover the truth, but his bandwidth was to small to contain it. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
time cube
I finally have a testable prediction for my Theory of Everything. Gene Ray will die today, peacefully, in his sleep. And the true meaning of the Time Cube will be revealed to the world. :-) -- Mark Buda her...@acm.org I get my monkeys for nothing and my dchimps for free. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
RE: Civilization-level quantum suicide
Why do you want to convince Richard Dawkins? You give him credit. Because I know that I know how to persuade him of the truth based on evidence *and* emotion. I can prove to him, personally, that I am God, and that I created the universe. And he will believe it. Because I can show him a causal loop between the mental world, the physical world, and the ficional world that explains both intelligent design *and* evolution. I can show him how man's sense of humor and laughter evolved, and how they're related to the causal loop. I can show him how love and the idea of God evolved, and how they're related to the causal loop. I can show him that Jesus was a real person, and was really God, and that the Catholic Church he despises is just a bad copy of the real thing, and I can show him how to fix it. And I can show the church how to fix it. But I have to do it one day at a time, and I have to do it by *talking* to people, or it's not worth my effort, because I have my own personal problems, and I can show how *they* are related to all this. And I can explain how Hari Seldon's psychohistory worked in Isaac Asimov's Foundation trilogy, because I have figured the whole damn thing out. What it all boils down to, guys, is that the reason marriage counseling works is that when two people love each other but can't live together they need a neutral third party to mediate because they can't understand each other's arguments. I understand Richard Dawkins and the Catholic Church well enough to get them talking, if they'll listen to me. I don't know how to get their attention without ruining my marriage. I'm trapped in God's logic trap. I've done my best to talk to the Church - I have spent a couple of hours with a priest, and he seems interested, but I can't figure out how to get him to do anything helpful. Is anybody willing to help me? I need help to get this done. I know the help will come one way or another, but I'm asking the members of the list: does anybody understand me or want to help me? Mark, if you're not kidding here I honestly think you may be experiencing some kind of mental disorder, perhaps a manic state (good description of these kinds of states by Oliver Sacks at http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2008/sep/25/a-summer-of-madness/?pagination=false ) or even the onset of schizophrenia...please consider seeing a psychiatrist, just to check! Of course it could be that you are psychologically normal but have just fallen under the sway of some very weird ideas...the fact that you can't actually explain these ideas but expect some weird synchronicity to occur in the physical presence of others that will allow you to convince them of the validity of these ideas is suspicious though, it seems like a form of magical thinking. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
RE: Civilization-level quantum suicide
Mark, if you're not kidding here I honestly think you may be experiencing some kind of mental disorder, perhaps a manic state (good description of these kinds of states by Oliver Sacks at http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2008/sep/25/a-summer-of-madness/?pagination=false ) or even the onset of schizophrenia...please consider seeing a psychiatrist, just to check! I'm not kidding. I understand your concern. If you were to interact with me in real time I'd probably seem fairly normal (assuming I wanted to seem normal, of course). But I'm fairly certain now that not only am I not experiencing a mental disorder, but that many so-called mental disorders are in fact, um, well, I'm not sure how to explain it yet. That's why I want people who know about this stuff to talk to me. I can explain schizophrenia. I can explain depression. I can explain visions, dreams, hallucinations, and all of that stuff. I have figure out the relationship betweeen all the disparate fields. I'm a jack of all trades, master of none. I don't have specialized knowledge of much of anything except computers, but I am a self-organizing autodidact who has figured it all out so can somebody *please* talk to me? Of course it could be that you are psychologically normal but have just fallen under the sway of some very weird ideas...the fact that you can't actually explain these ideas but expect some weird synchronicity to occur in the physical presence of others that will allow you to convince them of the validity of these ideas is suspicious though, it seems like a form of magical thinking. But it's a testable and falsifiable hypothesis, no? The reason the explanation of reality sounds crazy is that the precise form of the explanation depends on who is doing the explaining to whom. That's why you can't write it down. It can't all make sense at the same time to the same person, unless you're me. Got it? That's why you need me. You can't get the answers any other way. I think. It's really rather confusing. -- Mark Buda her...@acm.org I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide
I'm not kidding. I understand your concern It's also statistically more likely if you're a male between 18-25... that's when these sorts of brain farts are most common. It doesn't mean you're crazy, but the most important step to understanding what you're thinking is to understand that you're stuck in a set of thought patterns that is different than your normal thought patterns. You did post a testable prediction though -- that Gene Ray of Time Cube will die today. Let's say that today means within 24 hours of your post. If Gene Ray does die today, that would be reasonable evidence that you're onto *something* here, but I would want to see three predictions like that in a row to be sure. If he doesn't die today, would you accept that as evidence that you have not developed superpowers of super understanding? If Gene Ray doesn't die, the rational thing to do will be to accept your failure and calmly move on, rather than come up with some complex reason to rationalize it. If you do need to talk to someone, I'm willing to talk to you via video on Skype for 30 minutes or so. Send me an email off-list. On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 7:10 PM, Mark Buda her...@acm.org wrote: Mark, if you're not kidding here I honestly think you may be experiencing some kind of mental disorder, perhaps a manic state (good description of these kinds of states by Oliver Sacks at http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2008/sep/25/a-summer-of-madness/?pagination=false ) or even the onset of schizophrenia...please consider seeing a psychiatrist, just to check! I'm not kidding. I understand your concern. If you were to interact with me in real time I'd probably seem fairly normal (assuming I wanted to seem normal, of course). But I'm fairly certain now that not only am I not experiencing a mental disorder, but that many so-called mental disorders are in fact, um, well, I'm not sure how to explain it yet. That's why I want people who know about this stuff to talk to me. I can explain schizophrenia. I can explain depression. I can explain visions, dreams, hallucinations, and all of that stuff. I have figure out the relationship betweeen all the disparate fields. I'm a jack of all trades, master of none. I don't have specialized knowledge of much of anything except computers, but I am a self-organizing autodidact who has figured it all out so can somebody *please* talk to me? Of course it could be that you are psychologically normal but have just fallen under the sway of some very weird ideas...the fact that you can't actually explain these ideas but expect some weird synchronicity to occur in the physical presence of others that will allow you to convince them of the validity of these ideas is suspicious though, it seems like a form of magical thinking. But it's a testable and falsifiable hypothesis, no? The reason the explanation of reality sounds crazy is that the precise form of the explanation depends on who is doing the explaining to whom. That's why you can't write it down. It can't all make sense at the same time to the same person, unless you're me. Got it? That's why you need me. You can't get the answers any other way. I think. It's really rather confusing. -- Mark Buda her...@acm.org I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comeverything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Civilization-level quantum suicide
I'm not kidding. I understand your concern It's also statistically more likely if you're a male between 18-25... Statistics govern groups. I am an individual. I am 42. As was my father when I was born. What an interesting coincidence. Not. You did post a testable prediction though -- that Gene Ray of Time Cube will die today. Let's say that today means within 24 hours of your post. Sure. If Gene Ray does die today, that would be reasonable evidence that you're onto *something* here, but I would want to see three predictions like that in a row to be sure. Not only do I predict Gene Ray's death, but I can show you the relationship between Time Cube and string theory! I am not making this up. Why would I make this up? If he doesn't die today, would you accept that as evidence that you have not developed superpowers of super understanding? I'm not claiming super powers of super understanding. In fact, it is pure random luck that I happen to be in this position. I think. If Gene Ray doesn't die, the rational thing to do will be to accept your failure and calmly move on, rather than come up with some complex reason to rationalize it. It wasn't some kind of ironclad guarantee. It was just a prediction. Based on intuition, mainly. -- Mark Buda her...@acm.org I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
