On 04.02.2012 21:05 meekerdb said the following:
On 2/4/2012 9:09 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
As for computers having emotions, I am a practitioner and I am
working right now closely with engineers. I should say that the
modern market would love electronics with emotions. Just imagine
On 04 Feb 2012, at 21:11, meekerdb wrote:
On 2/4/2012 10:53 AM, acw wrote:
One can wonder what is the most general theory that we can
postulate to explain our existence. Tegmark postulates all of
consistent mathematics, whatever that is, but is 'all of consistent
mathematics'
Bruno,
I would agree that profit should be a tool. On the other hand it is
working this way. There are rules of a game that are adjusted by the
government accordingly and then what is not not forbidden is allowed. In
such a setup, if a new idea allows us to increase profit, then it might
be
On Feb 5, 2:09 am, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote:
Stephen is objecting that such abstract systems are, well, too
abstract. He'd prefer something more concrete - whatever concrete
might actually be.
Here is another way to look at that sentence:
Stephen is objecting that such
On Feb 2, 2:48 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 02 Feb 2012, at 00:25, Craig Weinberg wrote:
I just don't see how beliefs can be primitive.
They are not. You can define M believes p in arithmetic. (Bp)
You cannot define M knows p, but you can still simulate it in
arithmetic by
On 24.01.2012 22:56 meekerdb said the following:
In thinking about how to answer this I came across an excellent paper
by Roman Frigg and Charlotte Werndl
http://www.romanfrigg.org/writings/EntropyGuide.pdf which explicates
the relation more comprehensively than I could and which also gives
I hope Russell will indulge my comment on that first paragraph.
On 05 Feb 2012, at 15:41, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Feb 5, 2:09 am, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote:
Stephen is objecting that such abstract systems are, well, too
abstract. He'd prefer something more concrete -
On 05.02.2012 17:16 Evgenii Rudnyi said the following:
On 24.01.2012 22:56 meekerdb said the following:
In thinking about how to answer this I came across an excellent
paper by Roman Frigg and Charlotte Werndl
http://www.romanfrigg.org/writings/EntropyGuide.pdf which
explicates the relation
On Feb 5, 11:55 am, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
You don't understand Searle's thought experiment.
I understand it one hell of a lot better than Searle did, but that's not
really much of a boast.
The whole point
On Feb 5, 11:19 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
I hope Russell will indulge my comment on that first paragraph.
On 05 Feb 2012, at 15:41, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Feb 5, 2:09 am, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote:
Stephen is objecting that such abstract systems are,
On 2/5/2012 8:19 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
No. All universal numbers can interpret a number as a function on quantities, or as
properties on quantities, which are not quantities themselves. Universal numbers can
also transform, or interpret numbers as transformation of transformation, properties
On Sun, Feb 05, 2012 at 07:28:47PM +0100, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
The most funny it looks in the conclusion
p. 28(142) First, all notions of entropy discussed in this essay,
except the thermodynamic and the topological entropy, can be
understood as variants of some information-theoretic notion
On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 08:56:10PM +0100, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
First, we have not to forget the Third Law that states that the
change in entropy in any reaction, as well its derivatives, goes to
zero as the temperatures goes to zero Kelvin.
In this respect your question is actually nice,
On 2/5/2012 2:09 AM, Russell Standish wrote:
On Sat, Feb 04, 2012 at 01:22:10PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 03 Feb 2012, at 23:24, Stephen P. King wrote:
I am not missing a thing, Bruno. You are missing something
that is obvious to the rest of us.
If someone else can confirm this, and
On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 08:50:40PM +0100, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
I guess that you have never done a lab in experimental
thermodynamics. There are classical experiment where people measure
heat of combustion, heat capacity, equilibrium pressure, equilibrium
constants and then determine the
On Feb 5, 1:23 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 05 Feb 2012, at 17:14, Craig Weinberg wrote:
I just don't see how beliefs can be primitive.
They are not. You can define M believes p in arithmetic. (Bp)
You cannot define M knows p, but you can still simulate it in
arithmetic
Hi ACW,
On 2/4/2012 1:53 PM, acw wrote:
One can wonder what is the most general theory that we can postulate
to explain our existence. Tegmark postulates all of consistent
mathematics, whatever that is, but is 'all of consistent mathematics'
consistent in itself?
I have read several
17 matches
Mail list logo
