Re: Turning the tables on the doctor

On 2/22/2014 9:21 PM, LizR wrote: On 23 February 2014 17:40, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 2/22/2014 5:49 PM, David Nyman wrote: No, I don't think that follows. The indefinite continuation of consciousness is directly entailed by CTM. In fact it is equivalent to

Re: Turning the tables on the doctor

On 23 Feb 2014, at 06:21, LizR wrote: On 23 February 2014 17:40, meekerdb wrote: On 2/22/2014 5:49 PM, David Nyman wrote: No, I don't think that follows. The indefinite continuation of consciousness is directly entailed by CTM. In fact it is equivalent to the continuing existence of the se

Re: 3-1 views (was: Re: Better Than the Chinese Room)

On 22 Feb 2014, at 21:09, LizR wrote to Clark (with the "above pap" = the FPI of step 3): The "above pap" is only a small step in an argument (and it only reproduces a result obtained in the MWI, anyway). OK, but the MWI is a "big" thing, relying on another big thing: QM. The FPI assume

Re: Block Universes

On 23 Feb 2014, at 01:03, meekerdb wrote: On 2/22/2014 3:20 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: What if Einstein's reference frames ( does anyone else get the credit for this term?) function because reality is what I call Virtuality? Its the old simulation argument, served up by myself, today.

Re: 3-1 views (was: Re: Better Than the Chinese Room)

On 22 Feb 2014, at 19:45, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 1:39 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> Did the Helsinki Man see Washington and Moscow? Yes. > In the 3-1 view. Not in the 1-1 view. In who's "1-1 view"? You'll probably say in "The Helsinki Man's", No. The W-man and the M

Re: 3-1 views (was: Re: Better Than the Chinese Room)

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 7:45 PM, John Clark wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 1:39 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > >> Did the Helsinki Man see Washington and Moscow? Yes. >>> >> >> > In the 3-1 view. Not in the 1-1 view. >> > > In who's "1-1 view"? You'll probably say in "The Helsinki Man's", but

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On Sunday, February 23, 2014, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > On Saturday, February 22, 2014 2:05:47 PM UTC-5, stathisp wrote: >> >> >> >> On Saturday, February 22, 2014, Craig Weinberg >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Saturday, February 22, 2014 12:29:04 AM UTC-5, stathisp wrote: On 20 Februar

Re: Turning the tables on the doctor

On 23 February 2014 17:40, meekerdb wrote: > On 2/22/2014 5:49 PM, David Nyman wrote: > > No, I don't think that follows. The indefinite continuation of > consciousness is directly entailed by CTM. In fact it is equivalent to the > continuing existence of the sensible world (i.e. per comp, the w

Re: Turning the tables on the doctor

On 2/22/2014 5:49 PM, David Nyman wrote: No, I don't think that follows. The indefinite continuation of consciousness is directly entailed by CTM. In fact it is equivalent to the continuing existence of the sensible world (i.e. per comp, the world is what is observed). Hence any observer can exp

Re: Block Universes

On 23 February 2014 16:37, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > But if the block universe creates the effect of flowing time, as it must > if the idea is not to be summarily dismissed, this isn't an issue. > Would you like to take a small bet? I wager that Edgar will completely ignore your eminently s

Re: Block Universes

> > Last question: Why do you act every minute of every day as if you live in >> a present moment through which clock time flows if it actually doesn't? How >> can your mind be so completely deluded in this respect? Why does everyone >> in the world except a few members of the block universe cult b

Re: Block Universes

On Sunday, February 23, 2014, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jesse, > > 1. Do you agree you are actually a particular age right now today as you > read this? > Not Jesse, but yes. 2. Do you agree that I am actually a particular age right now today as I > write this, whether or not you know what that i

Re: Turning the tables on the doctor

On Saturday, February 22, 2014 8:49:33 PM UTC-5, David Nyman wrote: > > On 23 February 2014 00:27, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > > > >> >> On Saturday, February 22, 2014 4:06:39 PM UTC-5, David Nyman wrote: >> >>> On 22 February 2014 15:09, Craig Weinberg wrote: >>> On Saturday, Fe

Re: Block Universes

Maybe Edgar should start the "Edgar-thing" list, where he *does* have the unique power to dictate what will be discussed. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send a

Re: Block Universes

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 7:40 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jesse, > > 1. Do you agree you are actually a particular age right now today as you > read this? > Hey, more questions! But as usual, I see you demand that I answer your questions while you pointedly ignore the question I have repeatedly as

Re: Turning the tables on the doctor

On 23 February 2014 00:27, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > On Saturday, February 22, 2014 4:06:39 PM UTC-5, David Nyman wrote: > >> On 22 February 2014 15:09, Craig Weinberg wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Saturday, February 22, 2014 9:34:08 AM UTC-5, David Nyman wrote: >>> On 22 February 2014 14:25,

Re: Block Universes

Jesse, 1. Do you agree you are actually a particular age right now today as you read this? 2. Do you agree that I am actually a particular age right now today as I write this, whether or not you know what that is? 3. Do you agree that we can both agree on those two ages? 4. Do you agree that

Re: Block Universes

OK, maybe I won't bother with it after all. (My time is a bit limited...!) On 23 February 2014 13:03, meekerdb wrote: > On 2/22/2014 3:20 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: > > What if Einstein's reference frames ( does anyone else get the credit for > this term?) function because reality is what I

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On 2/22/2014 3:43 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote: On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 6:34 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 2/22/2014 3:22 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote: On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Edgar L. Owen mailto:edgaro...@att.net>> wrote: Jesse, But from the lin

Re: Turning the tables on the doctor

On Saturday, February 22, 2014 4:06:39 PM UTC-5, David Nyman wrote: > > On 22 February 2014 15:09, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > >> >> >> On Saturday, February 22, 2014 9:34:08 AM UTC-5, David Nyman wrote: >> >>> On 22 February 2014 14:25, Craig Weinberg wrote: >>> >>> If you say yes to the docto

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On Saturday, February 22, 2014 2:05:47 PM UTC-5, stathisp wrote: > > > > On Saturday, February 22, 2014, Craig Weinberg > > > wrote: > >> >> >> On Saturday, February 22, 2014 12:29:04 AM UTC-5, stathisp wrote: >>> >>> On 20 February 2014 09:24, Craig Weinberg wrote: >>> >>> >>> You're assumin

Re: Block Universes

On 2/22/2014 3:20 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: What if Einstein's reference frames ( does anyone else get the credit for this term?) function because reality is what I call Virtuality? Its the old simulation argument, served up by myself, today. Someone who has worked arduously on this concept

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 6:34 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 2/22/2014 3:22 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote: > > > On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > >> Jesse, >> >> But from the links you yourself provide: >> http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1985AmJPh..53..661O >> >> To quote from the abstr

Re: Block Universes

I'll give it a go. Us Kiwis have a rep for punching above our weight in physics, what with radioactivity and rotating black holes, to name but two (I hestitate to mention powered flight) so who knows, he may be onto something. On 23 February 2014 12:20, wrote: > What if Einstein's reference fra

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 12:37:06PM -0800, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jesse, > > But from the links you yourself provide: > http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1985AmJPh..53..661O > > To quote from the abstract: > > If a heavy object with rest mass M moves past you with a velocity > comparable to the spee

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On 2/22/2014 3:22 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote: On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Edgar L. Owen > wrote: Jesse, But from the links you yourself provide: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1985AmJPh..53..661O To quote from the abstract: If a heavy object with

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jesse, > > But from the links you yourself provide: > http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1985AmJPh..53..661O > > To quote from the abstract: > > If a heavy object with rest mass M moves past you with a velocity > comparable to the speed of light,

Re: Block Universes

What if Einstein's reference frames ( does anyone else get the credit for this term?) function because reality is what I call Virtuality? Its the old simulation argument, served up by myself, today. Someone who has worked arduously on this concept over the last, few, years, is mathematician, Br

Re: Block Universes

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jesse, > > I think the basic problem in our discussion, which seems intractable from > you answers below, is your basic belief that time doesn't doesn't flow, > that there is no such thing as a now in which you or the twins actually > exist.

Physicists' misuse of Planck units...

All, I have a big gripe about how physicists misuse (in my judgement) the whole notion of Planck units as if they somehow were the minimum possible units of various physical quantities such as time and length. It has become fashionable whenever physicists want to refer to the minimum sizes of

Re: Turning the tables on the doctor

On 22 February 2014 15:09, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > On Saturday, February 22, 2014 9:34:08 AM UTC-5, David Nyman wrote: > >> On 22 February 2014 14:25, Craig Weinberg wrote: >> >> If you say yes to the doctor, you are saying that originality is an >>> illusion >>> >> >> Not an illusion, an in

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

Brent, What problem do you think P-time has in SR? I see none. Have you been following my discussion with Jesse as to why it is possible to correlate proper times (the twins own actual ages) 1:1 for the twins all along their worldlines in a frame independent way simply by comparing the relativi

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

Jesse, But from the links you yourself provide: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1985AmJPh..53..661O To quote from the abstract: If a heavy object with rest mass M moves past you with a velocity comparable to the speed of light, you will be attracted gravitationally towards its path as though it

Re: Block Universes

Ghibbsa, Well, first of all my theory doesn't tell nature what to do, it asks nature what it does and attempts to explain it. All the issues you raise are good ones, but when my theory is understood it greatly SIMPLIFIES reality. It doesn't make it more complex as you claim. And in fact it clar

Re: 3-1 views (was: Re: Better Than the Chinese Room)

The "above pap" is only a small step in an argument (and it only reproduces a result obtained in the MWI, anyway). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email

Re: Block Universes

Jesse, I think the basic problem in our discussion, which seems intractable from you answers below, is your basic belief that time doesn't doesn't flow, that there is no such thing as a now in which you or the twins actually exist. From your answers it seems clear that you can't even bring your

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

John, First Linde didn't "prove" eternal inflation as you claim. Eternal inflation is a theory. In fact you yourself admit this when you write "IF Linde is correct..". Basically the bounding problem of any physical infinity is that it would take infinite energy over infinite time to 'achieve'

RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb On 2/21/2014 2:27 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: I am in agreement but I am guessing humankind does not yet possess a working LTFR that could power a large city. Nor, is a MSR (molten salt

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On Saturday, February 22, 2014, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > On Saturday, February 22, 2014 12:29:04 AM UTC-5, stathisp wrote: >> >> On 20 February 2014 09:24, Craig Weinberg wrote: >> >> >>> You're assuming that precise molecular assembly will necessarily >> yield a >> >>> coherent dynamic proce

Re: 3-1 views (was: Re: Better Than the Chinese Room)

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 1:39 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> Did the Helsinki Man see Washington and Moscow? Yes. >> > > > In the 3-1 view. Not in the 1-1 view. > In who's "1-1 view"? You'll probably say in "The Helsinki Man's", but his view is just of Helsinki. Perhaps you mean the future "1 view"

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 8:41 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > I hate it when otherwise intelligent physicists use infinite in the sense > of just really really big! > I hate that too, in fact I take pride in not using the word "infinite" unless a proper subset of the thing can be put into a one to one

Re: Turning the tables on the doctor

On Saturday, February 22, 2014 11:27:45 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 22 Feb 2014, at 15:25, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > If you say yes to the doctor, you are saying that originality is an > > illusion > > > Not at all. Your 1p-originality is preserved all the time. I'm not think

Re: Turning the tables on the doctor

On 22 Feb 2014, at 15:25, Craig Weinberg wrote: If you say yes to the doctor, you are saying that originality is an illusion Not at all. Your 1p-originality is preserved all the time. In the H-WM duplication experience, the experiencers get all a unique experience of the type I am the

Re: Turning the tables on the doctor

On 22 Feb 2014, at 02:39, David Nyman wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdxucpPq6Lc Ha ha! I love when he shows the identity cards! Note that this is among the thought experiences that I call "forbidden" on this list, some years ago. They are shortcuts, and can also provide "arguments

Re: Turning the tables on the doctor

On Saturday, February 22, 2014 9:34:08 AM UTC-5, David Nyman wrote: > > On 22 February 2014 14:25, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > > If you say yes to the doctor, you are saying that originality is an >> illusion >> > > Not an illusion, an invariant. > If it is invariant then it can't be original.

Re: Turning the tables on the doctor

On 22 February 2014 14:25, Craig Weinberg wrote: If you say yes to the doctor, you are saying that originality is an illusion > Not an illusion, an invariant. > and simulation is absolute. > Not absolute, but hopefully sufficient (i.e. the idea of a level of substitution). Hope that helps.

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 8:41 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > John, > > Yes, that's my understanding, but that wasn't clear in your original post. > > However it is simply impossible for anything physical to be "literally > infinite" when the nature of infinity as an unending PROCESS (forever add > +1)

Re: Turning the tables on the doctor

If you say yes to the doctor, you are saying that originality is an illusion and simulation is absolute. Arithmetic can do so many things, but it can't do something that can only be done once. Think of consciousness as not only that which can't be done more than once, it is that which cannot ev

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

John, Yes, that's my understanding, but that wasn't clear in your original post. However it is simply impossible for anything physical to be "literally infinite" when the nature of infinity as an unending PROCESS (forever add +1) rather than an actual number is understood. I hate it when other

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On Saturday, February 22, 2014 12:29:04 AM UTC-5, stathisp wrote: > > On 20 February 2014 09:24, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > > >>> You're assuming that precise molecular assembly will necessarily yield > a > >>> coherent dynamic process, but that may not be the case at all. If you > put > >

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On 22 Feb 2014, at 07:19, meekerdb wrote: On 2/21/2014 9:53 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: What could that mean? The diary of the M-guy and of the W-guy do > differentiate, and are different from the memory and records of the observer > which does not enter in the telebox. > I am not sure w

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On 22 Feb 2014, at 06:53, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On 20 February 2014 20:43, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 19 Feb 2014, at 22:50, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Thursday, February 20, 2014, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 19 Feb 2014, at 17:18, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On 18/02/2014, David

Philosophy experiments

http://www.philosophyexperiments.com/frankfurt/Default.aspx -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To p

Re: MODAL 5 (was Re: Better Than the Chinese Room)

On 21 Feb 2014, at 23:08, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Thursday, February 20, 2014, Bruno Marchal wrote: Hi Liz, On 20 Feb 2014, at 08:49, LizR wrote: On 19 February 2014 23:00, Bruno Marchal wrote: Liz, Others, I was waiting for you to answer the last questions to proceed. Any pr