On 18 May 2014, at 21:16, ghib...@gmail.com wrote:
Does this computer architecture assume not-comp?
No. Elementary arithmetic emulates n-synchronized oscillators for all
n, even infinite enumerable set of oscillators. You would need a
continuum of oscillators, with an explicit special
On 18 May 2014, at 21:37, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sunday, May 18, 2014 1:56:48 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2014, at 17:43, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Free Will Universe Model: Non-computability and its relationship to
the ‘hardware’ of our Universe
I saw his poster
On 19 May 2014, at 01:10, ghib...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm going to bullet point the key, hard-to-vary, components that may
or may not result in falsification. In doing so, I will be stating
not my personal preference, but the long standing convention. In
light of this faithfulness simply to
On 19 May 2014, at 03:05, Russell Standish wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 10:02:25AM +1200, LizR wrote:
I don't know the maths, but I think I understand the principle.
General
relativity predicts that space in the vicinity of massive bodies is
curved,
or non-Euclidean, like the surface
On 19 May 2014, at 03:26, LizR wrote:
On 19 May 2014 05:12, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com
wrote:
So you do not have a testable, falsifiable, theory Bruno. Not in the
scientific sense. No one calls you on this.here.but then
again.let's face
On 19 May 2014, at 05:11, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/18/2014 6:26 PM, LizR wrote:
On 19 May 2014 05:12, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com
wrote:
So you do not have a testable, falsifiable, theory Bruno. Not in
the scientific sense. No one calls you
on
On 19 May 2014 15:11, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/18/2014 6:26 PM, LizR wrote:
On 19 May 2014 05:12, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
So you do not have a testable, falsifiable, theory Bruno. Not in the
scientific sense. No one
On 19 May 2014 20:06, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
(*) You find him cute, you said, but you should see me with my new glasses
;)
Are you anything like Michael Caine in The Ipcress File ?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List
I now have a copy of Tronnies - I fear I may be taking exception even to
chapter one, which purports to give an overview of contemporary physics but
contains many statements that begin Scientists do not understand how...
many of which refer to things that scientists do, in fact, understand (or
at
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 9:27 PM, John Ross jr...@trexenterprises.comwrote:
John Clark
I plan to save your e-mails and maybe I will read some of them to the
audience if and when it turns out that I am correct and am awarded the
Nobel prize in Physics.
Glory for the winner, humiliation
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 3:05 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 May 2014 07:16, ghib...@gmail.com wrote:
Does this computer architecture assume not-comp?
I don't know, but I would think not, because comp allows reality to be
digitised at any level (e.g. sub atomic) which wouldn't
On Monday, May 19, 2014 8:31:53 AM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 19 May 2014, at 01:10, ghi...@gmail.com javascript: wrote:
I'm going to bullet point the key, hard-to-vary, components that may or
may not result in falsification. In doing so, I will be stating not my
personal preference,
Well said!!!
John R
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Telmo Menezes
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 3:44 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: TRONNIES
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 9:27 PM, John Ross
On Sun, May 18, 2014 John Ross jr...@trexenterprises.com wrote:
I plan to save your e-mails and maybe I will read some of them to the
audience if and when it turns out that I am correct and am awarded the
Nobel prize in Physics.
Wow what a honor, my humble words read out to the entire
My theory describes the internal structure of electrons, photons, protons,
atomic nuclei, magnetism, gravity, what preceded the Big Bang, universe
contraction, inflation and anti-gravity. In the (you would say very unlikely)
event that it turns out that I am correct and existing theories are
On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote:
His main interest is the mind-body problem; and my interest in that problem
is more
from an engineering viewpoint. What does it take to make a conscious
machine and
what are the advantages or disadvantages of doing so. Bruno says a machine
that
On Monday, May 19, 2014 2:59:52 AM UTC+1, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 12:15 AM, ghi...@gmail.com javascript: wrote:
On Sunday, May 18, 2014 10:55:03 PM UTC+1, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 7:22 PM, ghi...@gmail.com wrote:
On
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote:
His main interest is the mind-body problem; and my interest in that
problem is more from an engineering viewpoint. What does it take to make a
conscious machine and what are the
On 19 May 2014, at 11:38, LizR wrote:
On 19 May 2014 15:11, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/18/2014 6:26 PM, LizR wrote:
On 19 May 2014 05:12, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com
wrote:
So you do not have a testable, falsifiable, theory Bruno. Not in
Maybe Bruno would like to train an entry.
Brent
Original Message
http://www.nature.com/news/the-game-is-on-1.15167
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
On 19 May 2014, at 11:40, LizR wrote:
On 19 May 2014 20:06, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
(*) You find him cute, you said, but you should see me with my new
glasses ;)
Are you anything like Michael Caine in The Ipcress File ?
Only when reading mail.
But now I have progressive
On 5/19/2014 10:24 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote:
His main interest is the mind-body problem; and my interest in that
problem is
more from an
On Monday, May 19, 2014 7:26:40 AM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2014, at 21:16, ghi...@gmail.com javascript: wrote:
Does this computer architecture assume not-comp?
No. Elementary arithmetic emulates n-synchronized oscillators for all n,
even infinite enumerable set of
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:09 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 10:24 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote:
His main interest is the mind-body problem; and my interest in that
On Monday, May 19, 2014 6:24:45 PM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb meek...@verizon.netjavascript:
wrote:
On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote:
His main interest is the mind-body problem; and my interest in that
problem is more from an engineering
On Monday, May 19, 2014 7:40:35 PM UTC+1, ghi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, May 19, 2014 6:24:45 PM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb meek...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote:
His main interest is the mind-body problem; and
On 19 May 2014, at 16:46, ghib...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, May 19, 2014 8:31:53 AM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 19 May 2014, at 01:10, ghi...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm going to bullet point the key, hard-to-vary, components that
may or may not result in falsification. In doing so, I will
On Monday, May 19, 2014 7:47:05 PM UTC+1, ghi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, May 19, 2014 7:40:35 PM UTC+1, ghi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, May 19, 2014 6:24:45 PM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb meek...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 2:38
On Monday, May 19, 2014 8:15:32 PM UTC+1, ghi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, May 19, 2014 7:47:05 PM UTC+1, ghi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, May 19, 2014 7:40:35 PM UTC+1, ghi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, May 19, 2014 6:24:45 PM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014
On 5/19/2014 11:31 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:09 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 10:24 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
On Monday, May 19, 2014 8:09:15 PM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 19 May 2014, at 16:46, ghi...@gmail.com javascript: wrote:
On Monday, May 19, 2014 8:31:53 AM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 19 May 2014, at 01:10, ghi...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm going to bullet point the key, hard-to-vary,
Craig,
What about computer/automated trading software that currently executes the
majority of stock trades in the world? See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-frequency_trading
Then there are also those text messaging services where people pay $1 or
more per text message to chat with what
John R,
I looked briefly at chapter 2 last night and it appears to merely restate
your ideas, rather than giving any background reasoning. If so - I haven't
finished it yet - that leaves us in the position that you have given a
word-based description of a theory which is vastly at odds with
I don’t smoke, but I did not expect a cigar anyway.
I believe Chapter I is a fair assessment of current scientific thinking. (If I
honestly believe something but am not certain of, I believe use of the phrase
“I believe “ is appropriate.) Many scientist are skeptical of many features of
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:40 PM, ghib...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, May 19, 2014 6:24:45 PM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb meek...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote:
His main interest is the mind-body problem; and my interest
On 20 May 2014 11:17, John Ross jr...@trexenterprises.com wrote:
I don’t smoke, but I did not expect a cigar anyway.
I *believe* Chapter I is a fair assessment of current scientific
thinking. (If I honestly believe something but am not certain of, I
*believe* use of the phrase “I believe
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 9:33 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 11:31 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:09 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 10:24 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb
On Monday, May 19, 2014 5:52:35 PM UTC-4, Jason wrote:
Craig,
What about computer/automated trading software that currently executes the
majority of stock trades in the world? See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-frequency_trading
Then there are also those text messaging services
On 5/19/2014 4:56 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 9:33 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 11:31 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:09 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 20 May 2014 05:06, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote:
His main interest is the mind-body problem; and my interest in that
problem is more from an engineering viewpoint. What does it take to make a
conscious machine and what are the advantages or
On 20 May 2014 06:09, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 10:24 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 2:38 AM, LizR wrote:
His main interest is the mind-body problem; and my interest in that
problem is
On 20 May 2014 06:47, ghib...@gmail.com wrote:
Another major logical problem with this, I mentioned a while back in an
earlier thread. The whole position that matter is non-primary or non-real
or whatever, is effectively trivial and redundant UNLESS and UNTIL that
hypotheses produces major
On 5/19/2014 5:27 PM, LizR wrote:
On 20 May 2014 06:09, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 10:24 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On
On 20 May 2014 12:51, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 5:27 PM, LizR wrote:
On 20 May 2014 06:09, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 10:24 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 2:38
On 19 May 2014 13:13, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/18/2014 5:40 PM, LizR wrote:
On 17 May 2014 10:06, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear Liz, thanks for your care to reflect upon my text and I apologize
for my LATE REPLY.
You ask about my opinion on Tegmark's
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 01:12:20PM -0400, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
Accordingto Deutsch, MWI is falsifiable, with some actions of a quantum
computer. These would be the heavy hitters of QC, and not the lab toys we
have today, but we'd potentially have access to electrons in
On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 12:35:47 AM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:40 PM, ghi...@gmail.com javascript: wrote:
On Monday, May 19, 2014 6:24:45 PM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:06 PM, meekerdb meek...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014
On 5/19/2014 7:13 PM, LizR wrote:
On 19 May 2014 13:13, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/18/2014 5:40 PM, LizR wrote:
On 17 May 2014 10:06, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com
mailto:jami...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear Liz, thanks for your care to
On 20 May 2014 15:13, ghib...@gmail.com wrote:
That's a case of a good problem cut in two, one side murdered and buried
and forgotten, the other side pulped, mixed up with a pot of tea, some
facial moisturizer and a pack of tasty after eight mints, and generously
shared around the room all
At the risk of re-starting the Thorium wars grin this is a current article on
the why NOTS of Thorium. It addresses them point by point.
http://thebulletin.org/thorium-wonder-fuel-wasnt7156
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
On 20 May 2014 16:12, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 7:13 PM, LizR wrote:
On 19 May 2014 13:13, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/18/2014 5:40 PM, LizR wrote:
On 17 May 2014 10:06, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear Liz, thanks for your care to
On 5/19/2014 9:30 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List wrote:
At the risk of re-starting the Thorium wars grin this is a current article on the why
NOTS of Thorium. It addresses them point by point.
http://thebulletin.org/thorium-wonder-fuel-wasnt7156
A mishmash of criticism most
On 5/19/2014 9:40 PM, LizR wrote:
On 20 May 2014 16:12, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/19/2014 7:13 PM, LizR wrote:
On 19 May 2014 13:13, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 5/18/2014 5:40 PM, LizR
53 matches
Mail list logo
