Re: How to live forever

[Telmo Menezes]

Hi Russell,

On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 10:30 AM, Russell Standish
 wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 05:14:21PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>
>> Now, is a jellyfish conscious?
>>
>> I bet they are, but not far away from the dissociative and constant 
>> arithmetical consciousness (of the universal machines).
>
> As I'm sure you're aware, I disagree with this. Jellyfish appear to be
> quite simple automatons, with a distributed neural network, not any
> brain as such. However, my main reason for disagreeing is that
> anthropic reasoning leads us to conclude that most species of animal
> are not conscious. Our most typical animal is a nematode (for instance
> your favourite - the planarians), but even most insects cannot be
> conscious either.

I follow your anthropic reasoning, but am not convinced by the
implicit 1:1 correspondence between one minute of human consciousness
and one human of insect consciousness. I have no rigorous way of
saying this, but my intuition is the following: there is more content
in one minute of one than the other. I think it makes sense for the
probabilities to be weighted by this content, somehow.

Imagine a simple possibility: your anthropic reasoning being weighed
by the number of neurons in the given creature. See what I'm getting
at?

Cheers,
Telmo.

>
> --
>
> 
> Dr Russell StandishPhone 0425 253119 (mobile)
> Principal, High Performance Coders
> Visiting Senior Research Fellowhpco...@hpcoders.com.au
> Economics, Kingston University http://www.hpcoders.com.au
> 
>
> --
> 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: How to live forever

[Brent Meeker]

On 3/31/2018 1:30 AM, Russell Standish wrote:

On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 05:14:21PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:

Now, is a jellyfish conscious?

I bet they are, but not far away from the dissociative and constant 
arithmetical consciousness (of the universal machines).

As I'm sure you're aware, I disagree with this. Jellyfish appear to be
quite simple automatons, with a distributed neural network, not any
brain as such. However, my main reason for disagreeing is that
anthropic reasoning leads us to conclude that most species of animal
are not conscious. Our most typical animal is a nematode (for instance
your favourite - the planarians), but even most insects cannot be
conscious either.



In these discussions I always wonder what kind of consciousness is meant?

1. Perception.  light/dark  acid/base touch...
2. Self location relative to things.  Prey/predators
3. Self relative to others.  Sex and territory and rivals
4. Abstractions.  Number geometries
5.  Self reflection.  Theory of minds.  Language

Brent


--
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: How to live forever

[Russell Standish]

On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 05:14:21PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> 
> Now, is a jellyfish conscious? 
> 
> I bet they are, but not far away from the dissociative and constant 
> arithmetical consciousness (of the universal machines).

As I'm sure you're aware, I disagree with this. Jellyfish appear to be
quite simple automatons, with a distributed neural network, not any
brain as such. However, my main reason for disagreeing is that
anthropic reasoning leads us to conclude that most species of animal
are not conscious. Our most typical animal is a nematode (for instance
your favourite - the planarians), but even most insects cannot be
conscious either.


-- 


Dr Russell StandishPhone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Senior Research Fellowhpco...@hpcoders.com.au
Economics, Kingston University http://www.hpcoders.com.au


-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: How to live forever

[Russell Standish]

On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 11:01:22AM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> 
> > On 21 Mar 2018, at 01:35, John Clark  wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 7:27 PM, Bruce Kellett  > > wrote:
> >  
> > ​>​You don't need an instrument that can give a clean yes/no answer to the 
> > presence of consciousness to develop scientific theories about 
> > consciousness. We can start with the observation that all normal healthy 
> > humans are conscious, and that rocks and other inert objects are not 
> > conscious and work from there to develop a science of consciousness, based 
> > on evidence from the observation of behaviour.
> > 
> > But if it was all based on the observation of behavior then what you'd end 
> > up with is a scientific theory about intelligence not consciousness.
> 
> That is right. But if you agree that consciousness is a form of
non-provable but also non-doubtable knowledge,

Only with self-awareness. A non self-aware consciousness (if such a
thing exists) would have no knowledge whatsoever of its consciousness.

> and if you agree with
the standard definition of knowledge in philosophy of mind,

But isn't the Theatetus formula more a property of knowledge, rather
than being equivalent to knowledge itself? Couldn't Bp & P describe
things other than knowledge?

then it is a theorem that Peano Arithmetic is conscious. To believe that 
Robinson Arithmetic is conscious too (plausibly even more) is more tricky.
>

The premisses are already quite stretch :)


-- 


Dr Russell StandishPhone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Senior Research Fellowhpco...@hpcoders.com.au
Economics, Kingston University http://www.hpcoders.com.au


-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Nuclear FUSION reactor being developed at Lockheed for powered fighter jet

[agrayson2000]

On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 12:18:49 AM UTC, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 12:13:09 AM UTC, Lawrence Crowell wrote:
>>
>> On Monday, April 2, 2018 at 5:17:54 PM UTC-5, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Monday, April 2, 2018 at 6:24:00 PM UTC, Brent wrote:

 The date.

 Brent

>>>
>>> Trust me. If all else fails, COLD FUSION will come to the rescue. AG 
>>>
>>
>> Just as cold fusion has been roaring forwards with all sorts of progress 
>> over the last 29 years since its inception. 
>>
>> Not a single experiment has given strong evidence of any net energy due 
>> to fusion from cold fusion devices. And don't give me rubbish stuff on 
>> this. I want to see a published report in Phys. Rev. C or J. Ap. Phys or 
>> some credible journal for nuclear engineering. Don't give me some YouTube 
>> video or other crappy reference by nutwads claiming conspiracies and  ..., 
>> yeah you get the hint. I don't want to hear that crap.
>>
>> LC 
>>
>
> You're in dire need of a sense of humor. As for UFO, you really need to 
> apply the scientific method to find the nuggets of gold, or truth in this 
> case. AG 
>

On the UFO thing, it's much worse than I indicated. You clearly have zero 
ability to analyze evidence which poses a cognitive dissonance with your 
strongly held views, which are really based on nothing but negative bias. 
As the Great Trumpist would tweet; SAD!  AG 

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Nuclear FUSION reactor being developed at Lockheed for powered fighter jet

[agrayson2000]

On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 12:13:09 AM UTC, Lawrence Crowell wrote:
>
> On Monday, April 2, 2018 at 5:17:54 PM UTC-5, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Monday, April 2, 2018 at 6:24:00 PM UTC, Brent wrote:
>>>
>>> The date.
>>>
>>> Brent
>>>
>>
>> Trust me. If all else fails, COLD FUSION will come to the rescue. AG 
>>
>
> Just as cold fusion has been roaring forwards with all sorts of progress 
> over the last 29 years since its inception. 
>
> Not a single experiment has given strong evidence of any net energy due to 
> fusion from cold fusion devices. And don't give me rubbish stuff on this. I 
> want to see a published report in Phys. Rev. C or J. Ap. Phys or some 
> credible journal for nuclear engineering. Don't give me some YouTube video 
> or other crappy reference by nutwads claiming conspiracies and  ..., yeah 
> you get the hint. I don't want to hear that crap.
>
> LC 
>

You're in dire need of a sense of humor. As for UFO, you really need to 
apply the scientific method to find the nuggets of gold, or truth in this 
case. AG 

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Nuclear FUSION reactor being developed at Lockheed for powered fighter jet

[Lawrence Crowell]

On Monday, April 2, 2018 at 5:17:54 PM UTC-5, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> On Monday, April 2, 2018 at 6:24:00 PM UTC, Brent wrote:
>>
>> The date.
>>
>> Brent
>>
>
> Trust me. If all else fails, COLD FUSION will come to the rescue. AG 
>

Just as cold fusion has been roaring forwards with all sorts of progress 
over the last 29 years since its inception. 

Not a single experiment has given strong evidence of any net energy due to 
fusion from cold fusion devices. And don't give me rubbish stuff on this. I 
want to see a published report in Phys. Rev. C or J. Ap. Phys or some 
credible journal for nuclear engineering. Don't give me some YouTube video 
or other crappy reference by nutwads claiming conspiracies and  ..., yeah 
you get the hint. I don't want to hear that crap.

LC 

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Nuclear FUSION reactor being developed at Lockheed for powered fighter jet

[Lawrence Crowell]

On Monday, April 2, 2018 at 10:32:31 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 6:43 AM, Lawrence Crowell  > wrote:
>
> *​> ​I wonder what is wrong with this idea!*
>
>  
>
> ​ ​
>>
>> https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-30/lockheed-martin-patents-nuclear-fusion-powered-fighter-jet
>>
>
> I heard about that fusion project some time ago, but this one below is 
> much more recent and may be more credible because it uses high temperature 
> superconducting magnets and MIT is doing it. The presadent of MIT L. Rafael 
> Reif says "This is an important historical moment. Advances in 
> superconducting magnets have put fusion energy potentially within reach, 
> offering the prospect of a safe, carbon-free energy future.” I hope he’s 
> right.  
>
>
> http://news.mit.edu/2018/mit-newly-formed-company-launch-novel-approach-fusion-power-0309
>
> ​John K Clark​
>

No mention of aircraft propulsion.

LC 

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Nuclear FUSION reactor being developed at Lockheed for powered fighter jet

[agrayson2000]

On Monday, April 2, 2018 at 6:24:00 PM UTC, Brent wrote:
>
> The date.
>
> Brent
>

Trust me. If all else fails, COLD FUSION will come to the rescue. AG 

>
> On 4/2/2018 3:43 AM, Lawrence Crowell wrote:
>
> I wonder what is wrong with this idea! 
>
> LC
>
> On Sunday, April 1, 2018 at 6:34:34 PM UTC-5, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: 
>>
>>
>> https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-30/lockheed-martin-patents-nuclear-fusion-powered-fighter-jet
>>
> -- 
> 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-li...@googlegroups.com .
> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
>

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Nuclear FUSION reactor being developed at Lockheed for powered fighter jet

[Brent Meeker]

The date.

Brent

On 4/2/2018 3:43 AM, Lawrence Crowell wrote:

I wonder what is wrong with this idea!

LC

On Sunday, April 1, 2018 at 6:34:34 PM UTC-5, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:


https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-30/lockheed-martin-patents-nuclear-fusion-powered-fighter-jet



--
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


--
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Nuclear FUSION reactor being developed at Lockheed for powered fighter jet

[John Clark]

On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 6:43 AM, Lawrence Crowell <
goldenfieldquaterni...@gmail.com> wrote:

*​> ​I wonder what is wrong with this idea!*



​ ​
> https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-30/lockheed-martin-
> patents-nuclear-fusion-powered-fighter-jet
>

I heard about that fusion project some time ago, but this one below is much
more recent and may be more credible because it uses high temperature
superconducting magnets and MIT is doing it. The presadent of MIT L. Rafael
Reif says "This is an important historical moment. Advances in
superconducting magnets have put fusion energy potentially within reach,
offering the prospect of a safe, carbon-free energy future.” I hope he’s
right.

http://news.mit.edu/2018/mit-newly-formed-company-launch-novel-approach-fusion-power-0309

​John K Clark​









>
>> --
> 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: How to live forever

[Bruno Marchal]

> On 1 Apr 2018, at 00:29, Lawrence Crowell  
> wrote:
> 
> On Saturday, March 31, 2018 at 2:32:06 PM UTC-6, telmo_menezes wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 10:17 PM, Lawrence Crowell 
> > wrote: 
> > You would have to replicate then not only the dynamics of neurons, but 
> > every 
> > biomolecule in the neurons, and don't forget about the oligoastrocytes and 
> > other glial cells. Many enzymes for instance to multi-state systems, say in 
> > a simple case where a single amino acid residue of phosphorylated or 
> > unphosphorylated, and in effect are binary switching units. To then make 
> > this work you now need to have the brain states mapped out down to the 
> > molecular level, and further to have their combinatorial relationships 
> > mapped. Biomolecules also behave in water, so you have to model all the 
> > water molecules. Given the brain has around 10^{25} or a few moles of 
> > molecules the number of possible combinations might be on the order of 
> > 10^{10^{25}} this is a daunting task. Also your computer has to accurately 
> > encode the dynamics of molecules -- down to the quantum mechanics of their 
> > bonds. 
> > 
> > This is another way of saying that biological systems, even that of a basic 
> > prokaryote, are beyond our current abilities to simulate. You can't just 
> > hand wave away the enormous problems with just simulating a bacillus, let 
> > alone something like the brain. Now of course one can do some simulations 
> > to 
> > learn about the brain in a model system, but this is far from mapping a 
> > brain and its conscious state into a computer. 
> 
> Well maybe, but this is just you guessing. 
> Nobody knows the necessary level of detail. 
> 
> Telmo. 
> 
> Take LSD or psilocybin mushrooms and what enters the brain are chemical 
> compounds that interact with neural ligand gates. The effect is a change in 
> the perception of consciousness. Then if we load coarse grained brain states 
> into a computer that ignores lots of fine grained detail, will that result in 
> something different? Hell yeah! The idea one could set up a computer neural 
> network, upload some data file from a brain scan and that this would be a 
> completely conscious person is frankly absurd. 


This means that you bet on a lower substitution level. I guess others have 
already answered this. Note that the proof that physics is a branch of 
arithmetic does not put any bound of the graining of the substitution level. It 
could even be that your brain is the entire universe described at the level of 
superstring theory, that will change nothing in the conclusion of the 
reasoning. Yet it would be a threat for evolution and biology as conceived 
today.

Bruno 


> 
> LC
> 
> -- 
> 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> .

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: How to live forever

[Bruno Marchal]

> On 31 Mar 2018, at 23:12, Mindey I.  wrote:
> 
> Why not to just define yourself, and then try to re-run yourself? If you have 
> a mathematical definition of your own self, you are already close to living 
> forever as a running process based on that definition.

You cannot. It is a theorem in arithmetic: no universal machine can define 
itself. You can bet on a level of substitution, but you can’t prove, not even 
experimentally to yourself that you have found it. All this is detailed in some 
of my papers, or my older long texts.

Note that all computations are executed (in the original mathematical sense of 
Post, Church, Turing, …) in arithmetic. If you believe that a proposition like 
3^3 + 4^3 + 5^3 is equal to 6^3 independently of you verifying that fact or 
not, you are already “there”.

> 
> Personally, when I try to define myself, I bump into memories of strong sense 
> of curiosity, making me nearly cry of desire to know Everything.
> 
> Maybe most of us here on the "Everything-List" are like that. Maybe we're 
> equivalent?


Yes, that is the natural mystical understanding of the average universal 
numbers: there is only one person, but locally disconnected. I sum up often by 
“we are god playing hide-and-seek with Itself”, but the details of this are 
more demanding in machine’s theology (probability logic).

Bruno




> 
> On 31 March 2018 at 20:32, Telmo Menezes  > wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 10:17 PM, Lawrence Crowell
> mailto:goldenfieldquaterni...@gmail.com>> 
> wrote:
> > You would have to replicate then not only the dynamics of neurons, but every
> > biomolecule in the neurons, and don't forget about the oligoastrocytes and
> > other glial cells. Many enzymes for instance to multi-state systems, say in
> > a simple case where a single amino acid residue of phosphorylated or
> > unphosphorylated, and in effect are binary switching units. To then make
> > this work you now need to have the brain states mapped out down to the
> > molecular level, and further to have their combinatorial relationships
> > mapped. Biomolecules also behave in water, so you have to model all the
> > water molecules. Given the brain has around 10^{25} or a few moles of
> > molecules the number of possible combinations might be on the order of
> > 10^{10^{25}} this is a daunting task. Also your computer has to accurately
> > encode the dynamics of molecules -- down to the quantum mechanics of their
> > bonds.
> >
> > This is another way of saying that biological systems, even that of a basic
> > prokaryote, are beyond our current abilities to simulate. You can't just
> > hand wave away the enormous problems with just simulating a bacillus, let
> > alone something like the brain. Now of course one can do some simulations to
> > learn about the brain in a model system, but this is far from mapping a
> > brain and its conscious state into a computer.
> 
> Well maybe, but this is just you guessing.
> Nobody knows the necessary level of detail.
> 
> Telmo.
> 
> > LC
> >
> >
> > On Saturday, March 31, 2018 at 10:31:56 AM UTC-6, John Clark wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 8:24 PM, Lawrence Crowell
> >>  >> > wrote:
> >>
> >>> > Yes, and if you replace the entire brain with technology the peg leg is
> >>> > expanded into an entire Pinocchio. Would the really be conscious? It is 
> >>> > the
> >>> > case as well that so much of our mental processing does involve hormone
> >>> > reception and a range of other data inputs from other receptors and 
> >>> > ligands.
> >>
> >> I see nothing sacred in hormones, I don't see the slightest reason why
> >> they or any neurotransmitter would be especially difficult to simulate
> >> through computation, because chemical messengers are not a sign of
> >> sophisticated design on nature's part, rather it's an example of 
> >> Evolution's
> >> bungling. If you need to inhibit a nearby neuron there are better ways of
> >> sending that signal then launching a GABA molecule like a message in a
> >> bottle thrown into the sea and waiting ages for it to diffuse to its random
> >> target.
> >>
> >> I'm not interested in chemicals only the information they contain, I want
> >> the information to get transmitted from cell to cell by the best method and
> >> so I would not send smoke signals if I had a fiber optic cable. The
> >> information content in each molecular message must be tiny, just a few bits
> >> because only about 60 neurotransmitters such as acetylcholine,
> >> norepinephrine and GABA are known, even if the true number is 100 times
> >> greater (or a million times for that matter) the information content ofeach
> >> signal must be tiny. Also, for the long range stuff, exactly which neuron
> >> receives the signal can not be specified because it relies on a random
> >> process, diffusion. The fact that it's slow as molasses in February does 
> >> not
> >> add to its charm.
> >>
> >> If your job 

Re: Nuclear FUSION reactor being developed at Lockheed for powered fighter jet

[agrayson2000]

On Monday, April 2, 2018 at 1:41:49 PM UTC, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> On Monday, April 2, 2018 at 10:43:09 AM UTC, Lawrence Crowell wrote:
>>
>> I wonder what is wrong with this idea!
>>
>> LC
>>
>
> Fake news? But the patent seems real. Or are we being conned? AG 
>

Probably appropriate for April 1 !AG

>
>>
>> On Sunday, April 1, 2018 at 6:34:34 PM UTC-5, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-30/lockheed-martin-patents-nuclear-fusion-powered-fighter-jet
>>>
>>

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Nuclear FUSION reactor being developed at Lockheed for powered fighter jet

[Lawrence Crowell]

It sounds funny. Tokamac plasma confinement rings and magnetic mirror 
systems are not exactly light weight compact things. 

LC

On Monday, April 2, 2018 at 8:41:49 AM UTC-5, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> On Monday, April 2, 2018 at 10:43:09 AM UTC, Lawrence Crowell wrote:
>>
>> I wonder what is wrong with this idea!
>>
>> LC
>>
>
> Fake news? But the patent seems real. Or are we being conned? AG 
>
>>
>>
>> On Sunday, April 1, 2018 at 6:34:34 PM UTC-5, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-30/lockheed-martin-patents-nuclear-fusion-powered-fighter-jet
>>>
>>

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Nuclear FUSION reactor being developed at Lockheed for powered fighter jet

[agrayson2000]

On Monday, April 2, 2018 at 10:43:09 AM UTC, Lawrence Crowell wrote:
>
> I wonder what is wrong with this idea!
>
> LC
>

Fake news? But the patent seems real. Or are we being conned? AG 

>
>
> On Sunday, April 1, 2018 at 6:34:34 PM UTC-5, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-30/lockheed-martin-patents-nuclear-fusion-powered-fighter-jet
>>
>

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: How to live forever

[John Clark]

On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 2:42 AM, Stathis Papaioannou 
wrote:

​> *​*
> *The problem I was alluding to was how to interface with existing
> biological systems. You could make a camera that exceeds the performance of
> the human eye, but that doesn’t mean you can use it to replace damaged
> eyes. It would be easier to use the camera in a robot than a cyborg.*
>

​OK, I agree with that.

 John K Clark​

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Nuclear FUSION reactor being developed at Lockheed for powered fighter jet

[Lawrence Crowell]

I wonder what is wrong with this idea!

LC

On Sunday, April 1, 2018 at 6:34:34 PM UTC-5, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-30/lockheed-martin-patents-nuclear-fusion-powered-fighter-jet
>

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.