On 10/6/2013 10:36 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
Unfortunately, the thread about AUDA and its relation to pronouncs got
mixed up with another thread, and thus got delete on my computer.
Picking up from where we left off, I'm still trying to see the
relationship between Bp, Bpp, 1-I, 3-I and the
On 06 Oct 2013, at 19:03, meekerdb wrote:
On 10/6/2013 12:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 05 Oct 2013, at 19:55, John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
you have agreed that all bruno marchal are the original one (a
case where Leibniz
On 06 Oct 2013, at 18:08, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
Some academies are just prostituted to rotten (sometime) politics,
often just to get enough funding to survive.
Money is not the problem. Black, obscure and grey money is the
problem.
Wait, this is indeed the most fundamental question!
On 06 Oct 2013, at 19:48, John Clark wrote:
On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 3:43 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
The M-guy is the H-guy (the M-guy remembers having been the H-guy)
The H-guy turns into the M-guy, but they are not identical just as
you are not identical with the Bruno
On 06 Oct 2013, at 22:00, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sunday, October 6, 2013 5:06:31 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Oct 2013, at 03:17, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 5 October 2013 00:40, Bruno Marchal mar...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
The argument is simply summarised thus: it is impossible
On 07 Oct 2013, at 06:24, chris peck wrote:
Hi Brent
This is true, but it's also something Bruno has said many times.
If comp is correct (to the extent that the mind is a computation, at
least) then this is happening all the time. Heraclitus was right,
you aren't the same person even
On 07 Oct 2013, at 07:36, Russell Standish wrote:
Unfortunately, the thread about AUDA and its relation to pronouncs got
mixed up with another thread, and thus got delete on my computer.
Picking up from where we left off, I'm still trying to see the
relationship between Bp, Bpp, 1-I, 3-I and
On 06 Oct 2013, at 22:48, LizR wrote:
On 7 October 2013 06:48, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 3:43 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
The M-guy is the H-guy (the M-guy remembers having been the H-guy)
The H-guy turns into the M-guy, but they are
On 07 Oct 2013, at 10:20, Bruno Marchal wrote (to Russell):
Yes, you can read that in that way, but you get only the 3-view of
the 1-view.
I meant: you get only the 3-view ON the 1-view.
Not of.
Sorry,
Bruno
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because
Hi Bruno
Are you saying that the step 3 would provide a logical reason to say no to
the doctor, and thus abandoning comp?
I'm saying only the suicidal would expect a 50/50 chance of experiencing Moscow
(or Washington) after teleportation and then say yes to the doctor.
regards
From:
2013/10/7 chris peck chris_peck...@hotmail.com
Hi Bruno
* Are you saying that the step 3 would provide a logical reason to say
no to the doctor, and thus abandoning comp?*
I'm saying only the suicidal would expect a 50/50 chance of experiencing
Moscow (or Washington) after teleportation
Quentin
Either you should say probability are non sensical in the MWI or if you
accept them with the MWI, you should accept them the same way with the comp
duplication experience.
But MWI does have a problem when it comes to probabilities and it is taken very
seriously by Everetians and
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 3:20 PM, chris peck chris_peck...@hotmail.com wrote:
Quentin
Either you should say probability are non sensical in the MWI or if you
accept them with the MWI, you should accept them the same way with the comp
duplication experience.
But MWI does have a problem when
Hi Chris,
On 07 Oct 2013, at 13:39, chris peck wrote:
Are you saying that the step 3 would provide a logical reason to
say no to the doctor, and thus abandoning comp?
I'm saying only the suicidal would expect a 50/50 chance of
experiencing Moscow (or Washington) after teleportation and
On Monday, October 7, 2013 3:56:55 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Oct 2013, at 22:00, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sunday, October 6, 2013 5:06:31 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 06 Oct 2013, at 03:17, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 5 October 2013 00:40, Bruno Marchal
On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 4:48 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
The H-guy turns into the M-guy, but they are not identical just as you
are not identical with the Bruno Marchal of yesterday.
This is true, but it's also something Bruno has said many times.
Then Bruno is not always wrong.
If
2013/10/7 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 4:48 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
The H-guy turns into the M-guy, but they are not identical just as
you are not identical with the Bruno Marchal of yesterday.
This is true, but it's also something Bruno has said many
On Craig’s use of the term “Aesthetic”.
One of the hindrances preventing me from understanding Craig’s statements
is the pluralistic use of the term “aesthetics”. Sorry for not being able
to produce a proper account but the following conflicts will just be stream
of consciousness for 15 minutes:
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 3:50 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Rhetorical tricks my ass! These are details of profound importance
simply glossed over with the slapdash use of personal pronouns. And that's
pretty damn sloppy for a mathematician.
That's again an unconvincing
On 10/7/2013 7:02 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 3:20 PM, chris peck chris_peck...@hotmail.com wrote:
Quentin
Either you should say probability are non sensical in the MWI or if you
accept them with the MWI, you should accept them the same way with the comp
duplication
Bruno, I tried to control my mouse for a long time
The M guy is NOT the Y guy, when he remembers having been the Y guy.
Yes, you said it many times, but NOW again! Has this list no consequential
resolution?
Some people seem to have inexhaustible patience!
It was in the past and in the
On 10/7/2013 1:32 PM, John Mikes wrote:
Bruno, I tried to control my mouse for a long time
The M guy is NOT the Y guy, when he remembers having been the Y guy.
Yes, you said it many times, but NOW again! Has this list no consequential
resolution?
Some people seem to have inexhaustible
Bruno: you wrote:
*The US constitution is very good, but is not really followed, and things
like prohibition have put bandits into power, who have broken the important
separation of powers.*
*Lobbying and the role of money in politics should be revised. But we are a
bit out of topic here, I
M
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 4:38 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 10/7/2013 1:32 PM, John Mikes wrote:
Bruno, I tried to control my mouse for a long time
The M guy is NOT the Y guy, when he remembers having been the Y guy.
Yes, you said it many times, but NOW again! Has this
One thing wrong with the US constitution is that the right to bear arms
meant muskets and flintlock pistols at the time, but has been extended to,
for example, semi-automatic weapons. The people who wrote it were only
aware of single-shot weapons, even the colt revolver hadn't been invented!
If
Why is there such a huge argument about this duplication chamber business?
It seems to be not getting anywhere. Could you perhaps go back to the
original statement of step 3 and use that to point out what is wrong?
From memory step 3 was - Helsinki man is teleported to both Washington and
Moscow.
On 10/7/2013 3:01 PM, LizR wrote:
One thing wrong with the US constitution is that the right to bear arms meant muskets
and flintlock pistols at the time, but has been extended to, for example, semi-automatic
weapons. The people who wrote it were only aware of single-shot weapons, even the colt
Yes of course it's mostly handguns, just as most deaths aren't due to mass
shootings. Handguns are more common (cheaper, and easier to conceal if you
intend to commit a crime). Firearms cause around 30,000 deaths/year in the
US, apparently (plus about 70,000 injuries) - about the same number as
On 10/7/2013 4:14 PM, LizR wrote:
Yes of course it's mostly handguns, just as most deaths aren't due to mass shootings.
Handguns are more common (cheaper, and easier to conceal if you intend to commit a
crime). Firearms cause around 30,000 deaths/year in the US,
Of which 2/3 were suicides. I
I can understand why it seems that my use of 'aesthetic' (and sense) is all
over the place, and part of that is because I am trying to prompt others to
make a connection between all of the different uses of the word. What I
like about aesthetic is:
Anesthetic is used to refer to both general
On 8 October 2013 12:57, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 10/7/2013 4:14 PM, LizR wrote:
Yes of course it's mostly handguns, just as most deaths aren't due to
mass shootings. Handguns are more common (cheaper, and easier to conceal if
you intend to commit a crime). Firearms cause
On 10/7/2013 5:29 PM, LizR wrote:
On 8 October 2013 12:57, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 10/7/2013 4:14 PM, LizR wrote:
Yes of course it's mostly handguns, just as most deaths aren't due to mass
shootings. Handguns are more common (cheaper,
I've found the article I read...
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/new_scientist/2013/10/gun_violence_epidemiology_garen_wintemute_on_mental_illness_and_background.html
Unfortunately I haven't been able to find where I read that there would be
restrictions on what research into
Oops, silly me, it was in the very same article. I missed it when I skimmed
through to check...
*TO: After recent mass shootings, hasn't funding for gun violence research
received more attention?*
*GM:* There is a proposal in Congress to allow for $10 million in
research funding. But I suspect
On 10/7/2013 8:15 PM, LizR wrote:
Oops, silly me, it was in the very same article. I missed it when I skimmed through to
check...
*TO: After recent mass shootings, hasn't funding for gun violence research
received
more attention?*
*GM:* There is a proposal in Congress to allow for
On 8 October 2013 16:36, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 10/7/2013 8:15 PM, LizR wrote:
Oops, silly me, it was in the very same article. I missed it when I
skimmed through to check...
*TO: After recent mass shootings, hasn't funding for gun violence
research received more
On 10/7/2013 9:08 PM, LizR wrote:
On 8 October 2013 16:36, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 10/7/2013 8:15 PM, LizR wrote:
Oops, silly me, it was in the very same article. I missed it when I skimmed
through
to check...
*TO: After recent
37 matches
Mail list logo
