On Feb 7, 5:52 pm, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 6, 11:30 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
More seriously, in the chinese room experience, Searle's error can be
seen also as a confusion of level. If I can emulate Einstein brain,
I can answer all question
On Feb 7, 5:54 pm, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 peterdjo...@yahoo.com wrote:
But then why wouldn;t agents have knowledge of each others FW functions.
I can't answer that question because I don't know what FW functions are,
and forget functions I don't even
On Feb 7, 12:52 pm, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 7, 12:01 am, 1Z peterdjo...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Feb 6, 9:48 pm, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 6, 7:12 am, ronaldheld ronaldh...@gmail.com wrote:
arXiv:1202.0720v1 [physics.hist-ph]
On Feb 8, 6:45 am, 1Z peterdjo...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Feb 7, 12:52 pm, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
It depends if you consider biology metaphysical. Free will is a
capacity which we associate with living organisms,
rightly or wrongly
There may not be a rightly or
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 8:00 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote:
If it were completely dependent though, there would no experience of
decision at all.
I don't understand why people insist on infusing great mystery and
significance and resort to mystical crap like free floating glow
On Feb 8, 2:07 pm, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 8, 6:45 am, 1Z peterdjo...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Feb 7, 12:52 pm, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
It depends if you consider biology metaphysical. Free will is a
capacity which we associate with living
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 peterdjo...@yahoo.com wrote:
Since it is predictable, it is deterministic
Yes.
since it is determiniistic it is no free.
Cannot comment because your definition of free will was nonsensical and the
problem seems to be more with the free part than the will part. I have
On 07 Feb 2012, at 18:52, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Feb 6, 11:30 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
More seriously, in the chinese room experience, Searle's error can be
seen also as a confusion of level. If I can emulate Einstein brain,
I can answer all question you ask to Einstein,
On 2/8/2012 11:46 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 07 Feb 2012, at 18:52, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Feb 6, 11:30 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
I think Quentin has a theory here, that you might be stupid.
Joseph Knight has another theory, which is that you are a troll.
Umm, could
On Feb 8, 4:27 pm, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 peterdjo...@yahoo.com wrote:
Since it is predictable, it is deterministic
Yes.
since it is determiniistic it is no free.
Cannot comment because your definition of free will was nonsensical and the
problem
On 2/8/2012 7:45 AM, John Clark wrote:
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 8:00 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com
mailto:whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
If it were completely dependent though, there would no experience of
decision at all.
I don't understand why people insist on infusing great
On Feb 8, 6:41 pm, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 8, 11:01 am, 1Z peterdjo...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Feb 8, 2:07 pm, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
It depends if you consider biology metaphysical. Free will is a
capacity which we associate
On 07.02.2012 23:06 Russell Standish said the following:
On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 08:15:10PM +0100, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Russell,
This is circular - temperature is usually defined in terms of
entropy:
T^{-1} = dS/dE
This is wrong. The temperature is defined according to the Zeroth
Law. The
On Feb 8, 2:32 pm, 1Z peterdjo...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Feb 8, 6:41 pm, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 8, 11:01 am, 1Z peterdjo...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Feb 8, 2:07 pm, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
It depends if you consider biology
On Wed, Feb 08, 2012 at 08:32:16PM +0100, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
It sounds to me like you are arguing for a shift back to how
thermodynamics was before the Bolztmann's theoretical understanding.
A back-to-roots movement, as it were.
I would like rather to understand the meaning of your
On Feb 7, 7:04 pm, Evgenii Rudnyi use...@rudnyi.ru wrote:
Let us take a closed vessel with oxygen and hydrogen at room
temperature. Then we open a platinum catalyst in the vessel and the
reaction starts. Will then the information in the vessel be conserved?
Evgenii
What's the difference
On Feb 8, 8:31 pm, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 8, 2:32 pm, 1Z peterdjo...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Feb 8, 6:41 pm, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 8, 11:01 am, 1Z peterdjo...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Feb 8, 2:07 pm, Craig Weinberg
On 2/8/2012 1:44 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
On Wed, Feb 08, 2012 at 08:32:16PM +0100, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
It sounds to me like you are arguing for a shift back to how
thermodynamics was before the Bolztmann's theoretical understanding.
A back-to-roots movement, as it were.
I would
18 matches
Mail list logo
