Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 29 Dec 2013, at 20:35, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 6:10 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Liz, No, it is clear that your here is not the same as mine because you are not here. However it is quite clear that you absolutely must be doing something in the exact same present moment that I write t

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Hi LizR, Round and round we go... This sentence "It emerges because instants are connected to each other in a way that makes there appear to be smooth change between them." does not explain anything. I have read just about every book and paper that attempts to explain time away. All fail on this

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/29/2013 9:05 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 11:43 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/29/2013 6:59 PM, Jason Resch wrote: That is the only way to make progress. Propose theories, and falsify them. Ockham says between theories that ma

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 29 Dec 2013, at 20:30, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 5:59 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Liz, Reality doesn't seem to have any difficulty computing the results of random choices. If reality computes, then reality is a computer/universal-number. If reality is physical reality, then this is

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On 30 December 2013 19:36, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Hi Jason, > > On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 1:20 AM, Jason Resch wrote: > >> On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 12:43 AM, Stephen Paul King < >> stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: >> >>> Dear Jason, >>> >>> You seem to be ignoring the role of the transitory

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 29 Dec 2013, at 20:25, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 5:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 22:23, meekerdb wrote: On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: For a long time I got opponent saying that we cannot generate computationally a random number, and that is right, if

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On 30 December 2013 18:43, Stephen Paul King wrote: > Dear Jason, > > You seem to be ignoring the role of the transitory that is involved in > the discussion here. The fact is that we are asking questions about things > we are trying to understand. Merely stating that this is that ignores the >

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On 30 December 2013 14:59, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 4:41 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 30 December 2013 09:35, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > >> Liz, >> >> Good questions. The computations take place in P-time which is the >> universal processor cycle in which they execute. The results of the >> comp

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 1:36 AM, Stephen Paul King < stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: > Hi Jason, > > > On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 1:20 AM, Jason Resch wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 12:43 AM, Stephen Paul King < >> stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: >> >>> Dear Jason, >>> >>> You

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Hi Jason, On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 1:20 AM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 12:43 AM, Stephen Paul King < > stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: > >> Dear Jason, >> >> You seem to be ignoring the role of the transitory that is involved in >> the discussion here. >> > > I am no

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 12:43 AM, Stephen Paul King < stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: > Dear Jason, > > You seem to be ignoring the role of the transitory that is involved in > the discussion here. > I am not ignoring it, but showing it is unnecessary to suppose it is fundamental rather than

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Dear Jason, You seem to be ignoring the role of the transitory that is involved in the discussion here. The fact is that we are asking questions about things we are trying to understand. Merely stating that this is that ignores the point. Where doth change emerge if it does not exist at all? T

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 12:20 AM, Stephen Paul King < stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: > Hi Jason, > > So what is turning the "knob" on the values of y (or x)? > Nothing, the whole graph exists at once, but y varies as x varies. Why does x=1,y=9 have to be destroyed to make room for x=2,y=11

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 11:54 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 7:45 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 6:58 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/29/2013 3:49 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:42 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 12/29/2013 2:08

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Hi Jason, So what is turning the "knob" on the values of y (or x)? On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 9:40 PM, Stephen Paul King < > stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: > >> Dear Brent, >> >>I have a persisting question. How is is that we

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 11:43 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 6:59 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > That is the only way to make progress. Propose theories, and falsify > them. Ockham says between theories that make equal predictions, simpler > ones are better, and it for theories of equal simpl

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/29/2013 7:45 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 6:58 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/29/2013 3:49 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:42 PM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/29/2013 2:08 PM, Jason

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/29/2013 6:59 PM, Jason Resch wrote: That is the only way to make progress. Propose theories, and falsify them. Ockham says between theories that make equal predictions, simpler ones are better, and it for theories of equal simplicity, ones that can explain more are also better. Anti-rea

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 6:58 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 3:49 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:42 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/29/2013 2:08 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 12/29/2013 1:28 PM

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 9:40 PM, Stephen Paul King < stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: > Dear Brent, > >I have a persisting question. How is is that we can get away with using > verbs (implying actions) when we are describing timeless entities? > > In the same way we can say that y increases

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > All, > > All, > > Once we accept the obvious observable fact that we share a common present > moment when we are together we need to take the next step and establish > that we also share a common present moment when we are separated in space

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 6:52 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 3:31 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:29 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/29/2013 2:01 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 1:47 AM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 12/28/2013 6:41 PM,

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Dear Brent, I have a persisting question. How is is that we can get away with using verbs (implying actions) when we are describing timeless entities? On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 8:59 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 4:41 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 30 December 2013 09:35, Edgar L. Owen wrote:

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 12/29/2013 5:19 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: All, All, Once we accept the obvious observable fact that we share a common present moment when we are together we need to take the next step and establish that we also share a common present moment when we are separated in space. Only if we can pro

Re: Dear Edgar Owen

I don't intend to play DA or Defense just muse about the 'firmness' of a temporary "scientific belief" (even supportable by tests using instruments - or theories - based on the acceptability of those "beliefs"). There were 'centuries' with scientific belief of the Geocentric pattern - when Coperni

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On 12/29/2013 4:41 PM, LizR wrote: On 30 December 2013 09:35, Edgar L. Owen mailto:edgaro...@att.net>> wrote: Liz, Good questions. The computations take place in P-time which is the universal processor cycle in which they execute. The results of the computations compute dimens

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Brent, I give a detailed answer to your question in my new topic on "Another shot of how spacetime emerges from computational reality". Best, Edgar On Sunday, December 29, 2013 8:36:55 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > On 12/29/2013 4:37 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 30 December 2013 13:02, Edgar L. Owen

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Hi Brent, No conserved doesn't mean all the energy of every moment remains in that moment which is somehow still real. What it means is that when it is recomputed in every moment none of it is lost. The only energy that exists exists in the present moment, and it is always (in the same frame)

Re: Dear Edgar Owen

On 30 December 2013 14:22, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 4:07 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 30 December 2013 12:57, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > >> Well Mr. Owen used the 101 crackpot dictionary... he knows the truth >> (since so long) and we are the dumbest people on earth... but by a miracle >> (tha

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Once more unto the breach... On 30 December 2013 14:19, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Step 1: Two observers stand together with the same clock times on their > watches and shake hands. By direct observation they confirm they share both > the same actual present moment time, and the same clock time. > >

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 12/29/2013 4:37 PM, LizR wrote: On 30 December 2013 13:02, Edgar L. Owen mailto:edgaro...@att.net>> wrote: Pierz, Liz and Frequent Flyer, Jeez, you guys, this seems to be becoming a matter of sacred religious dogma to you and someone who doesn't agree deserves to burned at the

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Far from it, really;-) I assure you, I wish you no burning at any stakes, whether literal or figurative. You are perfectly entitled to be as incorrect as you wish, especially in an area as solidly established as relativistic physics. It's just that (a ma parte, at least), I feel a bit bad for y

Re: Dear Edgar Owen

On 12/29/2013 4:07 PM, LizR wrote: On 30 December 2013 12:57, Quentin Anciaux > wrote: Well Mr. Owen used the 101 crackpot dictionary... he knows the truth (since so long) and we are the dumbest people on earth... but by a miracle (that only he knows) he

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

All, All, Once we accept the obvious observable fact that we share a common present moment when we are together we need to take the next step and establish that we also share a common present moment when we are separated in space. Only if we can prove that can we establish that the present mom

Re: "humans are machines unable to recognize the fact that they are machines,"

On Sunday, December 29, 2013 6:42:20 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 28 Dec 2013, at 15:40, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > "humans are machines unable to recognize the fact that they are machines," >> > > Who wrote this? > > *any* ideally correct machines is unable to recognize the fact that t

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On 30 December 2013 09:35, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Liz, > > Good questions. The computations take place in P-time which is the > universal processor cycle in which they execute. The results of the > computations compute dimensional space and CLOCK time. > > So an external time dimension is require

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 30 December 2013 12:18, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Pierz, > > If block time is actual and something actually exists in past times then > the energy must actually exist there and be real also. > So far so good... > Thus a new > universe of energy is being created at every new moment of time. >

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 30 December 2013 13:02, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Pierz, Liz and Frequent Flyer, > > Jeez, you guys, this seems to be becoming a matter of sacred religious > dogma to you and someone who doesn't agree deserves to burned at the stake! > Lighten up guys and take a deep breath, they're just theories

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 30 December 2013 11:55, Pierz wrote: > Obviously that does not necessarily follow but Mr Owen has invested so > much in his idea (he's written a book - self-published one might assume) > that he is incapable of seriously questioning it any more. Sigh. That was my first assumption, but I hesi

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 30 December 2013 12:03, Richard Ruquist wrote: > PS: You can blame me for Roger as well. > > You're a wicked, wicked man! But fear not, you bring 'em on and the assembled brainpower around here will shoot them down. (Must.resist.schadenfreude.) -- You received this message beca

Re: Dear Edgar Owen

On 30 December 2013 12:57, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > Well Mr. Owen used the 101 crackpot dictionary... he knows the truth > (since so long) and we are the dumbest people on earth... but by a miracle > (that only he knows) he feel compelled to overwhelm us with his truth and > his patronizing vocab

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Pierz, Liz and Frequent Flyer, Jeez, you guys, this seems to be becoming a matter of sacred religious dogma to you and someone who doesn't agree deserves to burned at the stake! Lighten up guys and take a deep breath, they're just theories! :-) Edgar On Sunday, December 29, 2013 5:55:09 PM U

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/29/2013 3:49 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:42 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/29/2013 2:08 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/29/2013 1:28 PM, Jason

Re: Dear Edgar Owen

Well Mr. Owen use the 101 crackpot dictionary... he knows the truth (since so long) and we are the dumbest people on earth... but by a miracle (that only he knows) he feel compelled to overwhelm us with his truth and his patronizing vocabulary... why ? Quentin 2013/12/30 freqflyer07281972 > Mi

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/29/2013 3:31 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:29 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/29/2013 2:01 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 1:47 AM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/28/2013 6:41 PM, Jason

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:42 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 2:08 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/29/2013 1:28 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 2:25 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 12/29/2013 5:56 AM,

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

ALL HAIL TIME CUBE!! On Sunday, December 29, 2013 6:35:10 PM UTC-5, freqflyer07281972 wrote: > > In order for criticism to be effective, the one being criticized must be > willing to see his errors, something I think you have long ago given up. > > I'm afraid there is

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

In order for criticism to be effective, the one being criticized must be willing to see his errors, something I think you have long ago given up. I'm afraid there is no help for you, my friend. On Sunday, December 29, 2013 6:11:59 PM UTC-5, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > Richard, > > It is true I ent

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 12/29/2013 3:18 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Pierz, If block time is actual and something actually exists in past times then the energy must actually exist there and be real also. Thus a new universe of energy is being created at every new moment of time. Energy is not being converted from one

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:29 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 2:01 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 1:47 AM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/28/2013 6:41 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 8:32 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 12/28/2013 4:45 PM,

Dear Edgar Owen

Might I respectfully suggest the following: 1) That when you have an "obvious" intuition or brilliant stroke of insight that goes against a century or more of insight from the most distinguished physicists and 2) That when you are unable to operationalize your intuition in such a way that othe

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Pierz, If block time is actual and something actually exists in past times then the energy must actually exist there and be real also. Thus a new universe of energy is being created at every new moment of time. Energy is not being converted from one form to another but stored in each moment of

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Richard, It is true I entered university aged 15 and earned my BS in math and physics with honors and a minor in philosophy aged 18. I never claimed to be a genius though. :-) And Richard, thanks again for the invite to the group! It's a good forum to try to clarify the presentation of my idea

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

PS: You can blame me for Roger as well. On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote: > all, > According to Mr. Qwen, he was a child genius. > On every other list he has appeared the genius still. > So I thought I should subject him to this list. > Thanks for coming through. > Richard

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

all, According to Mr. Qwen, he was a child genius. On every other list he has appeared the genius still. So I thought I should subject him to this list. Thanks for coming through. Richard On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Pierz wrote: > Agreed, Liz. His bizarre misunderstandings about block time

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Agreed, Liz. His bizarre misunderstandings about block time (it violates conservation of energy) and sundry other statements exhibiting poor comprehension of modern physics reveal him to be exactly what you suspected early on: a crackpot. The question he put to you in which he asked if you ceas

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/29/2013 2:08 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/29/2013 1:28 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 2:25 PM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/29/2013 5:56 AM, Bruno

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/29/2013 2:01 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 1:47 AM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/28/2013 6:41 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 8:32 PM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/28/2013 4:45 PM, Jason

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Stephen Paul King < stephe...@provensecure.com> wrote: > Dear Brent and Jason, > > I think that this is an important idea: the relationship between > compression algorithms and numbers. It does not look like a simple > one-to-one and onto map! > > Stephen, For a

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 1:28 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 2:25 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/29/2013 5:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 28 Dec 2013, at 22:23, meekerdb wrote: >> >> On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno March

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

Dear Brent and Jason, I think that this is an important idea: the relationship between compression algorithms and numbers. It does not look like a simple one-to-one and onto map! On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 1:28 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Sun, D

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 1:47 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/28/2013 6:41 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 8:32 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/28/2013 4:45 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 7:12 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 12/27/2013 10:31 PM

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 3:05 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote > > >> Are faster-than-light influences involved? >>> >> >> > No. >> > > That means you think things are local. > > >> 2. When it is determined whether or not Schrodinger's cat is alive o

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/29/2013 1:28 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 2:25 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/29/2013 5:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 22:23, meekerdb wrote: On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: For a long time I g

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 2:25 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 5:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 28 Dec 2013, at 22:23, meekerdb wrote: > > On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > For a long time I got opponent saying that we cannot generate > computationally a random number, an

Re: What are wavefunctions?

John, No. See the explanation in my new topic "Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality" and you will (hopefully) see why those problems are avoided... Edgar On Sunday, December 29, 2013 3:05:24 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Edgar L

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 12/29/2013 9:36 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Dec 2013, at 14:52, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Bruno, Glad we agree that decoherence falsifies collapse. That's a good start! But decoherence also falsifies MW. Non collapse = many-worlds, to me. If I make a quantum choice, by QM, I will put myse

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 3:29 PM, LizR wrote: > violations of Bell's inequality can also be explained by time symmetry > (Huw Price and John Bell, private communications). > I have no idea what that private communication is, but I do know that time is NOT symmetric. John K Clark -- You recei

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On 12/29/2013 9:16 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: All, I want to try to state my model of how spacetime is created by quantum events more clearly and succinctly. Begin by Imagining a world in which everything is computational. In particular where the usually imagined single pre-existing dimensiona

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

I think I've read enough to be fairly sure that Mr Owen doesn't understand the problem. Brent just stated it uneqivocally. There is no unique mapping from one observer's present moments to another's, or to put it another way, there are an infinite number of equally valid mappings. It took scientist

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Liz, Good questions. The computations take place in P-time which is the universal processor cycle in which they execute. The results of the computations compute dimensional space and CLOCK time. There doesn't have to be any notion of physical space for computations to take place within. The ta

Re: What are wavefunctions?

Not quite, violations of Bell's inequality can also be explained by time symmetry (Huw Price and John Bell, private communications). On 30 December 2013 09:05, John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote > > >> Are faster-than-light influences involved? >>> >> >>

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 6:15 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> Cramer's transactional interpretation is non-local. >> > > Not really. It's slower-than-light, but retro. > If you can reach the finish line of a race before you even hear the starting gun I'd say you're pretty damn fast. >From Wikipedia: "

Re: All randomness is quantum...

Well OK, but that's *one* way in which randomness isn't quantum. On 30 December 2013 07:59, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 2:37 AM, LizR wrote: > > On 29 December 2013 13:11, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > >> Jason and John, >> >> If something is random it can't be computed by any deterministic >>

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On 30 December 2013 06:16, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Begin by Imagining a world in which everything is computational. In > particular where the usually imagined single pre-existing dimensional > spacetime background does NOT exist. > How would this work? What is doing this computing, and how and wh

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Hi Edgar, I like Kevin Knuth's theory of emergent space time. It is far more simple and does not need to get into quantum aspects other than a basic notion of an observer. An observer is a simple entity whose state is changed as the result of an observation/interaction: A nice video of one of

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote >> Are faster-than-light influences involved? >> > > > No. > That means you think things are local. >> 2. When it is determined whether or not Schrodinger's cat is alive or >> dead? >> > > >> The cat is always either dead or alive. It's j

Re: God or not?

On 12/29/2013 8:14 AM, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Bruno Marchal > wrote: > I use Platonism, where God == Truth. I know what "truth" means as an attribute of a sentence. But I don't know what "Truth" means? The set of all true sentences

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 12/29/2013 6:10 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Liz, No, it is clear that your here is not the same as mine because you are not here. However it is quite clear that you absolutely must be doing something in the exact same present moment that I write this sentence. That is the present moment that w

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 12/29/2013 5:59 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Liz, Reality doesn't seem to have any difficulty computing the results of random choices. That's how practically all computations occur. If we assume, or define, reality as computational then reality is computing random results by definition. It's ob

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

On 12/29/2013 5:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Dec 2013, at 22:23, meekerdb wrote: On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: For a long time I got opponent saying that we cannot generate computationally a random number, and that is right, if we want generate only that numbers. but a simp

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

Bruno, To answer your last question please refer to the new topic I just started "Another stab at how spacetime emergences computationally" or something like that. I forget exactly how I titled it... Best, Edgar On Sunday, December 29, 2013 12:36:05 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 29 D

Re: All randomness is quantum...

On 12/29/2013 2:37 AM, LizR wrote: On 29 December 2013 13:11, Edgar L. Owen mailto:edgaro...@att.net>> wrote: Jason and John, If something is random it can't be computed by any deterministic process. That's the meaning. I thought the digits of pi were random, but computable by a

Re: God or not?

On 29 Dec 2013, at 17:14, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > I use Platonism, where God == Truth. So God is "my dog just took a dump". Oh! I hope your dog is OK. > "God" is not that much a bad name. It is a VERY bad name if someone sincerely w

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 29 Dec 2013, at 15:19, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason, O, for God's sakes! You believe souls exist? I thought this was supposed to be a scientific forum! I guess *you* take seriously some theory of soul, to be so sure that it does not exist, or could not have any sense. "soul" is often

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 29 Dec 2013, at 14:52, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Bruno, Glad we agree that decoherence falsifies collapse. That's a good start! But decoherence also falsifies MW. Non collapse = many-worlds, to me. If I make a quantum choice, by QM, I will put myself in a superposition and execute the tw

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

Jason, O, for God's sakes. No wonder you believe in block time, MW, the nonexistence of the present moment and the tooth fairy!;-) Just wait till I present my theory of consciousness! Edgar On Sunday, December 29, 2013 12:04:31 PM UTC-5, Jason wrote: > > > > On Dec 29, 2013, at 8:19 AM, "Edg

Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

All, I want to try to state my model of how spacetime is created by quantum events more clearly and succinctly. Begin by Imagining a world in which everything is computational. In particular where the usually imagined single pre-existing dimensional spacetime background does NOT exist. Now co

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On Dec 29, 2013, at 8:19 AM, "Edgar L. Owen" wrote: Jason, O, for God's sakes! You believe souls exist? I do. I think many accepted and leading theories in science suggest that the "soul" for lack of a better word. It is that each of us has that feels and experiences, it is immaterial,

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Dec 29, 2013, at 8:17 AM, "Edgar L. Owen" wrote: Jason, You agree "No one is denying the reality of the present, just that it is the "only" reality." OK, that's immense progress we are making! So, the present moment does exist, and we agree on that. So now the only issue is that yo

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: >> With Quantum Mechanics NOTHING is a wave function, that is to say no >> observable quantity is. The wave function is a calculation device of no >> more reality than lines of longitude and latitude. If you want to talk >> about reality you'v

Re: All randomness is quantum...

On Dec 29, 2013, at 4:37 AM, LizR wrote: On 29 December 2013 13:11, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason and John, If something is random it can't be computed by any deterministic process. That's the meaning. I thought the digits of pi were random, but computable by a deterministic process? T

Re: God or not?

On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > I use Platonism, where God == Truth. > So God is "my dog just took a dump". > "God" is not that much a bad name. > It is a VERY bad name if someone sincerely wishes to avoid confusion and wants to use language honestly. Never mind what y

Re: All randomness is quantum...

On 29 Dec 2013, at 11:37, LizR wrote: On 29 December 2013 13:11, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason and John, If something is random it can't be computed by any deterministic process. That's the meaning. I thought the digits of pi were random, but computable by a deterministic process? Well,

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

Dear Bruno, I think that you are reading too much into what I wrote. Interleaving. On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 7:07 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 28 Dec 2013, at 17:07, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > I agree with what you wrote to Richard. If we then consider interactions > between multiple sep

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 29 Dec 2013, at 02:26, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Stephen, In a sense that's correct, they are actions and the actions are the computations, but they aren't physical, at least in the usual sense. Computations are not physical. I agree. They are arithmetical notion. But I can't understand wha

Re: All randomness is quantum...

On 29 Dec 2013, at 00:28, Jesse Mazer wrote: Jason Resch wrote: "indeed quantum randomness itself may only be a special case of this new type of randomness (discovered by Bruno)." I don't think Bruno claims to have discovered the notion that there can be first-person randomness even in a

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Pierz, A lot of meat in your post. Thanks! I'll answer most of your questions Yes, observers observe they are in the same present moment by the simultaneity of events. Exactly, but the important point is that is the simultaneity of actual events, not of clock time readings. Observers can s

Re: All randomness is quantum...

On 28 Dec 2013, at 23:15, John Mikes wrote: List: Is there a 'well' acceptable definition for "R A N D O M"? (my non- Indo-European mothertongue has no word expressing the meaning - if I got it right. My 2nd mothertongue (German) calls it "exbeliebig" = kind of: whatever I like) My position

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 28 Dec 2013, at 22:40, John Mikes wrote: Dear Bruno, when you wrote: "...arithmetic > number's dreams => physics OK? Physics is based on experience, but not on human one. And experiences are based on arithmetic/computer-science..." for the 'unbiased reader ' you started to seem (p

  1   2   >