Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/4/2017 9:35 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 5/12/2017 4:00 pm, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/4/2017 7:23 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 5/12/2017 2:03 pm, Russell Standish wrote: On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 12:18:02PM +1100, Bruce Kellett wrote: Randomness in the sense that I am using it arises in

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/6/2017 1:46 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: I suspect that this is perhaps why Brent want to refer to the environment for relating consciousness to the machine, and in Artificial Intelligence, some people defend the idea that (mundane) consciousness occur only when the environment contradicts

Fwd: [math-fun] Deep Mind crushes chess

The AI is coming for your job. Brent Forwarded Message https://chess24.com/en/read/news/deepmind-s-alphazero-crushes-chess "Stockfish is the reigning TCEC computer chess champion, and while it failed to make the final this year it went unbeaten in 51 games. In a match with t

Re: Is AI really a threat to mankind?

When I took a series of classes in Artificial Intelliegence at UCLA in the '70s the professor introducing the material of the first class explained that, "Intelligence is whatever a computer can't doyet." Brent On 12/7/2017 1:32 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: Both: is very very hard to simu

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/7/2017 1:01 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 11:50 PM, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/6/2017 1:46 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: I suspect that this is perhaps why Brent want to refer to the environment for relating consciousness to the machine, and in Artificial Intelligence

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/7/2017 9:36 AM, David Nyman wrote: On 7 Dec 2017 15:08, "Bruno Marchal" <mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> wrote: On 07 Dec 2017, at 10:01, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 11:50 PM, Brent Meeker mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrot

Re: Is AI really a threat to mankind?

On 12/7/2017 3:19 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 9:47:42 PM UTC, Brent wrote: When I took a series of classes in Artificial Intelliegence at UCLA in the '70s the professor introducing the material of the first class explained that, "Intelligenc

Re: cosmic big rip

On 12/7/2017 3:43 PM, Lawrence Crowell wrote: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23631550-600-dark-energy-is-mutating-with-grave-consequences-for-the-cosmos/ This is inter

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/7/2017 4:43 PM, smitra wrote: On 08-12-2017 00:22, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 8/12/2017 3:31 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 06 Dec 2017, at 12:19, Bruce Kellett wrote: But as I pointed out, thermal motion gives momenta of magnitudes such that the quantum uncertainties are negligible compare

Re: Is AI really a threat to mankind?

On 12/7/2017 6:37 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, December 8, 2017 at 1:42:01 AM UTC, Brent wrote: On 12/7/2017 3:19 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 9:47:42 PM UTC, Brent wrote: When I took a series of classes in Artificial

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/7/2017 5:05 PM, David Nyman wrote: On 7 December 2017 at 21:49, Brent Meeker <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/7/2017 9:36 AM, David Nyman wrote: On 7 Dec 2017 15:08, "Bruno Marchal" mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> wrote: On 07

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/8/2017 12:01 AM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 11:54:39 PM UTC, Bruce wrote: On 8/12/2017 10:40 am, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 4:44:01 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: Yes, but only if the phase are

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/8/2017 2:09 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 4:08 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 07 Dec 2017, at 10:01, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 11:50 PM, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/6/2017 1:46 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: I suspect that this is perhaps why Brent want

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/8/2017 2:24 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 10:47 PM, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/7/2017 1:01 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 11:50 PM, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/6/2017 1:46 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: I suspect that this is perhaps why Brent want to

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/8/2017 4:27 PM, smitra wrote: On 08-12-2017 01:46, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 8/12/2017 11:43 am, smitra wrote: On 08-12-2017 00:22, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 8/12/2017 3:31 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 06 Dec 2017, at 12:19, Bruce Kellett wrote: But as I pointed out, thermal motion gives

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/8/2017 4:49 PM, smitra wrote: It's not irrelevant if you don't have the information that locates you in a sector where the uncertainties are indeed small enough. You have to start with the complete state in the bird's view, and then consider the sector where you have some definite infor

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/8/2017 4:55 PM, smitra wrote: On 09-12-2017 01:40, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/8/2017 4:27 PM, smitra wrote: On 08-12-2017 01:46, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 8/12/2017 11:43 am, smitra wrote: On 08-12-2017 00:22, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 8/12/2017 3:31 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 06 Dec

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/8/2017 4:49 PM, smitra wrote: If this were not true then each single conscious experience would contain in it information about such things as the exact  number of atoms in the Earth, Sun etc. etc. That sounds like a reductio against the comp theory of consciousness. Brent -- You rec

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/9/2017 2:22 AM, smitra wrote: On 09-12-2017 02:03, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/8/2017 4:49 PM, smitra wrote: It's not irrelevant if you don't have the information that locates you in a sector where the uncertainties are indeed small enough. You have to start with the complet

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/9/2017 2:36 AM, smitra wrote: Yes, it's a different argument but it's also generically correct. But I do think for the discussions in this list it doesn't matter all that much whether an initial single branch will diverge into multiple branches due to effectively classical dynamics. B

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/9/2017 4:00 AM, smitra wrote: On 09-12-2017 12:01, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 9/12/2017 9:44 pm, smitra wrote: On 09-12-2017 02:48, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 9/12/2017 11:49 am, smitra wrote: On 09-12-2017 00:03, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 9/12/2017 4:21 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 08 Dec 2

Re: Is AI really a threat to mankind?

On 12/9/2017 6:48 AM, Lawrence Crowell wrote: On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 5:19:02 PM UTC-6, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 9:47:42 PM UTC, Brent wrote: When I took a series of classes in Artificial Intelliegence at UCLA in the '70s the

Re: Cosmological Red Shift

On 12/9/2017 10:38 AM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: But you don't know which part of the shift of the H is due to cosmological expansion, so that's why the method I described seems necessary. You must estimate how much is due to expansion alone via distance knowledge and Hubble's law, and th

Re: Is AI really a threat to mankind?

On 12/9/2017 1:13 PM, Lawrence Crowell wrote: On Saturday, December 9, 2017 at 2:31:48 PM UTC-6, Brent wrote: On 12/9/2017 6:48 AM, Lawrence Crowell wrote: On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 5:19:02 PM UTC-6, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 9

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/9/2017 1:38 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: So, when you project the global quantum state on the subspace spanned by b I don't understand "subspace spanned by b" where b is a bitstring? Does it mean the subspace for which b is true...when b is interpreted in some way in terms of the variabl

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/10/2017 4:06 AM, smitra wrote: On 09-12-2017 21:12, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/9/2017 2:36 AM, smitra wrote: Yes, it's a different argument but it's also generically correct. But I do think for the discussions in this list it doesn't matter all that much whether an

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/10/2017 4:42 AM, smitra wrote: On 09-12-2017 21:18, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/9/2017 4:00 AM, smitra wrote: On 09-12-2017 12:01, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 9/12/2017 9:44 pm, smitra wrote: On 09-12-2017 02:48, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 9/12/2017 11:49 am, smitra wrote: On 09-12-2017 00

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/10/2017 7:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 09 Dec 2017, at 01:40, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/8/2017 4:27 PM, smitra wrote: On 08-12-2017 01:46, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 8/12/2017 11:43 am, smitra wrote: On 08-12-2017 00:22, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 8/12/2017 3:31 am, Bruno Marchal

Re: Equivalence Principle and Einstein Field Equations

On 12/10/2017 8:49 AM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: What is the connection between the Equivalence Principle and Einstein's Field Equations? It led to the idea that force-free paths in space could be geodesic paths in spacetime, so the apparent acceleration falling objects could be modelle

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/10/2017 9:26 AM, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 2:15 AM, >wrote: ​> ​ The fundamental unproven assumption, and IMO the core fallacy of the MWI, is the belief that what CAN occur, necessarily MUST will occur. The ​ ​ fundamental ​

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/10/2017 5:23 PM, smitra wrote: On 10-12-2017 22:55, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/10/2017 4:06 AM, smitra wrote: On 09-12-2017 21:12, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/9/2017 2:36 AM, smitra wrote: Yes, it's a different argument but it's also generically correct. But I do thi

Re: Cosmological Red Shift

On 12/10/2017 5:25 PM, Lawrence Crowell wrote: On Sunday, December 10, 2017 at 5:13:38 PM UTC-6, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Sunday, December 10, 2017 at 10:54:11 PM UTC, Lawrence Crowell wrote: On Sunday, December 10, 2017 at 3:34:33 PM UTC-6, agrays...@gmai

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/11/2017 3:48 AM, smitra wrote: On 10-12-2017 23:09, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/10/2017 4:42 AM, smitra wrote: On 09-12-2017 21:18, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/9/2017 4:00 AM, smitra wrote: On 09-12-2017 12:01, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 9/12/2017 9:44 pm, smitra wrote: On 09-12-2017 02

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/11/2017 12:11 PM, smitra wrote: On 11-12-2017 20:03, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/11/2017 3:48 AM, smitra wrote: On 10-12-2017 23:09, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/10/2017 4:42 AM, smitra wrote: On 09-12-2017 21:18, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/9/2017 4:00 AM, smitra wrote: On 09-12-2017 12:01

Re: Equivalence Principle and Einstein Field Equations

On 12/11/2017 2:19 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: What is the connection between the Equivalence Principle and Einstein's Field Equations? It led to the idea that force-free paths in space could be geodesic paths in spacetime, so the apparent acceleration falling obje

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/11/2017 4:44 PM, smitra wrote: On 11-12-2017 23:15, Bruce Kellett wrote: ... Rubbish. The central point of contention on this thread is whether a coin toss can be regarded as a classical event, with probabilities given by ignorance of the initial conditions, or as a quantum event with p

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/11/2017 4:54 PM, smitra wrote: As I have said before, the biggest challenge for quantum physics is to explain the emergence of the classical world from the quantum substrate, so that classical calculations actually get the correct answers in those classical situations. If you do not belie

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/11/2017 6:02 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 12/12/2017 12:29 pm, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, December 12, 2017 at 1:25:11 AM UTC, Bruce wrote: On 12/12/2017 12:18 pm, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, December 12, 2017 at 1:04:08 AM UTC, Bruce wrote: O

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/12/2017 6:21 PM, John Clark wrote: ​>​ I've been saying all along that a conscious observer is not needed to create or destroy the interference ​ I know you have. And I've been asking all along exactly what is it that collapses the wave function. If its not an observer and

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/12/2017 6:21 PM, John Clark wrote: ​> ​ He seemed to claim it negated the main claim of MWI, that everything that CAN happen, DOES happen. ​I don't see how.​ I pointed out that is inconsistent with SWE to say that anything possible actually happens.  "Possible" needs to

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/13/2017 2:45 AM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: *BUT for a nucleus of a radioactive element, the nucleus is never Decayed and Undecayed SIMULTANEOUSLY.* Sure it is.  It's in a coherent superposition of those states until it interacts with the environment. Brent -- You received this m

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/13/2017 3:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: The coin does not start in a state of the kind  {|heads> + |tails>}, but it starts with a state of having mulitiple positions and multiple momenta, spreaded in the multiverse according to the Heisenberg Uncertainty. The tiny difference in the positi

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/13/2017 2:20 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Wednesday, December 13, 2017 at 9:15:36 PM UTC, Brent wrote: On 12/13/2017 2:45 AM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: *BUT for a nucleus of a radioactive element, the nucleus is never Decayed and Undecayed SIMULTANEOUSLY.*

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/13/2017 5:24 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Wednesday, December 13, 2017 at 10:44:14 PM UTC, Brent wrote: On 12/13/2017 2:20 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Wednesday, December 13, 2017 at 9:15:36 PM UTC, Brent wrote: On 12/13/2017 2:45 AM, agrays...@gm

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/13/2017 7:38 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Thursday, December 14, 2017 at 2:39:12 AM UTC, John Clark wrote: On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 9:10 PM, > wrote: ​ ​>>​ Detected? I thought consciousness had nothing to do with it. Who is

Re: Schrodinger's cat problem; proposed solution

On 12/14/2017 6:27 PM, Jason Resch wrote: *I don't see how Wigner's friend presents a problem for Copenhagen. According to the CI, the wf collapses when the system measured, which is when the box is opened. What am I missing? The issue of the cat's memory is a different matter,

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/15/2017 9:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 13 Dec 2017, at 22:23, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/13/2017 3:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: The coin does not start in a state of the kind  {|heads> + |tails>}, but it starts with a state of having mulitiple positions and multiple m

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/15/2017 9:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: that the statistics of the observable, in arithmetic from inside, have to "interfere" to make Digital Mechanism making sense in cognitive science, so MW-appearances is not bizarre at all: it has to be like that. Eventually, the "negative amplitude o

Re: Schrodinger's cat problem; proposed solution

On 12/16/2017 1:18 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Saturday, December 16, 2017 at 8:22:47 PM UTC, Lawrence Crowell wrote: On Saturday, December 16, 2017 at 1:35:36 PM UTC-6, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Saturday, December 16, 2017 at 6:00:30 PM UTC, John Clark

Re: Equivalence Principle and Einstein Field Equations

On 12/16/2017 2:59 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: There's a problem applying SR in this situation because neither the ground or orbiting clock is an inertial frame.AG An orbiting clock is in an inertial frame.  An inertial frame is just one in which no forces are acting (and gravity is no

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/17/2017 7:32 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:   But in fact the box is not isolated. Oh? Just isolate the whole universe. That should be easy. The box too is interacting with the environment.  So it's like the Zeno effect.  Although there is a probability at each impact of producing a coh

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/17/2017 8:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Dec 2017, at 22:19, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/15/2017 9:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: that the statistics of the observable, in arithmetic from inside, have to "interfere" to make Digital Mechanism making sense in cognitive scie

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/17/2017 8:46 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: I guess you also know my position about this. You are taking an a priori position of what consciousness is, and how it fits reality and just running with it. It is irrelevant here if the human-level AI already exists or not. Knowing how to make someth

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/17/2017 9:03 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 7:53 PM, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/8/2017 2:24 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 10:47 PM, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/7/2017 1:01 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 11:50 PM, Brent Meeker

Re: Equivalence Principle and Einstein Field Equations

On 12/17/2017 2:39 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Sunday, December 17, 2017 at 12:21:27 AM UTC, Brent wrote: On 12/16/2017 2:59 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: There's a problem applying SR in this situation because neither the ground or orbiting clock is an inertial fra

Re: Equivalence Principle and Einstein Field Equations

On 12/18/2017 12:19 AM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Sunday, December 17, 2017 at 10:39:18 PM UTC, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Sunday, December 17, 2017 at 12:21:27 AM UTC, Brent wrote: On 12/16/2017 2:59 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: There's a problem appl

Re: Equivalence Principle and Einstein Field Equations

On 12/18/2017 6:36 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday, December 18, 2017 at 8:48:08 PM UTC, Brent wrote: On 12/18/2017 12:19 AM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Sunday, December 17, 2017 at 10:39:18 PM UTC, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Sunday, December 17

Re: Equivalence Principle and Einstein Field Equations

On 12/18/2017 6:54 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, December 19, 2017 at 2:36:32 AM UTC, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday, December 18, 2017 at 8:48:08 PM UTC, Brent wrote: On 12/18/2017 12:19 AM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Sunday, December 1

abc conjecture

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=5104 How much more acute this problem will become when AI reaches human and super-human levels. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop

Re: Equivalence Principle and Einstein Field Equations

On 12/18/2017 11:44 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: Invariants are always the important things in physics because they are what we can have intersubjective agreement on. Brent *IIUC, the field equations are covariant, which means coordinate system independent. * Right.  Cov

Re: Equivalence Principle and Einstein Field Equations

On 12/18/2017 11:54 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, December 19, 2017 at 3:32:22 AM UTC, Brent wrote: On 12/18/2017 6:36 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday, December 18, 2017 at 8:48:08 PM UTC, Brent wrote: On 12/18/2017 12:19 AM, agrays...@gmail.

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/19/2017 9:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 18 Dec 2017, at 07:17, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/17/2017 7:32 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:   But in fact the box is not isolated. Oh? Just isolate the whole universe. That should be easy. The box too is interacting with the environment

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/19/2017 9:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 18 Dec 2017, at 07:48, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/17/2017 8:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Dec 2017, at 22:19, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/15/2017 9:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: that the statistics of the observable, in arithmetic from

Re: Equivalence Principle and Einstein Field Equations

On 12/19/2017 7:58 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, December 19, 2017 at 8:58:18 PM UTC, Brent wrote: On 12/18/2017 11:54 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, December 19, 2017 at 3:32:22 AM UTC, Brent wrote: On 12/18/2017 6:36 PM, agrays...@gmail.

Re: Schrodinger's cat problem; proposed solution

On 12/20/2017 3:33 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: You need to read the papers or ask question. The starting point (which is not obvious and requires the reading of the Universal Doevtailer Argument) is that you cannot have both a mechanist explanation of the mind, and physicalism. This is false.

Re: Schrodinger's cat problem; proposed solution

On 12/20/2017 3:44 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 19 Dec 2017, at 11:27, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, December 19, 2017 at 8:03:00 AM UTC, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday, December 18, 2017 at 6:37:39 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote:

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 12/20/2017 5:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 19 Dec 2017, at 23:03, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/19/2017 9:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 18 Dec 2017, at 07:48, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/17/2017 8:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Dec 2017, at 22:19, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12

Fwd: Time's Arrow in a Quantum Universe I: On the Simplicity and Uniqueness of the Initial Quantum State

This is something that computationalism might have something to say about. Brent Forwarded Message Chen, Eddy Keming (2017) Time's Arrow in a Quantum Universe I: On the Simplicity and Uniqueness of the Initial Quantum State. [Preprint] Abstract In a quantum universe with

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/21/2017 3:27 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Hi David, Sometimes your responses really puzzle me Brent. What you say above almost makes it sound as though you just don't get the distinction Telmo is pointing to. But based on what you have said at other times I think you do get it, but because

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/21/2017 3:34 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: So we are told. But what if someone could look at a recorded MRI of you brain and tell you what you were thinking? Why do you need the MRI? You can look at the text that I write and know what I'm thinking. We've been doing that all along. The text I

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/21/2017 5:01 AM, David Nyman wrote: On 21 December 2017 at 11:34, Telmo Menezes > wrote: > So we are told.  But what if someone could look at a recorded MRI of you > brain and tell you what you were thinking? Why do you need the MRI? You ca

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/21/2017 12:28 PM, David Nyman wrote: On 21 Dec 2017 18:58, "Brent Meeker" <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/21/2017 3:27 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Hi David, Sometimes your responses really puzzle me Brent. What you

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/21/2017 12:37 PM, David Nyman wrote: On 21 Dec 2017 19:25, "Brent Meeker" <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/21/2017 5:01 AM, David Nyman wrote: On 21 December 2017 at 11:34, Telmo Menezes mailto:te...@telmomenezes.com>> wrote:

Re: Equivalence Principle and Einstein Field Equations

On 12/21/2017 2:04 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, December 19, 2017 at 8:51:51 PM UTC, Brent wrote: On 12/18/2017 11:44 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: Invariants are always the important things in physics because they are what we can have intersubjecti

Re: Equivalence Principle and Einstein Field Equations

On 12/21/2017 4:22 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Thursday, December 21, 2017 at 11:03:53 PM UTC, Brent wrote: On 12/21/2017 2:04 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, December 19, 2017 at 8:51:51 PM UTC, Brent wrote: On 12/18/2017 11:44 PM, agrays...@gmai

Re: Equivalence Principle and Einstein Field Equations

On 12/21/2017 11:06 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, December 22, 2017 at 4:46:10 AM UTC, Brent wrote: On 12/21/2017 4:22 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Thursday, December 21, 2017 at 11:03:53 PM UTC, Brent wrote: On 12/21/2017 2:04 PM, agrays...@gmail

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/22/2017 2:25 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/21/2017 3:34 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: So we are told. But what if someone could look at a recorded MRI of you brain and tell you what you were thinking? Why do you need the MRI? You can

Re: Equivalence Principle and Einstein Field Equations

On 12/22/2017 3:43 AM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, December 22, 2017 at 7:45:42 AM UTC, Brent wrote: On 12/21/2017 11:06 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, December 22, 2017 at 4:46:10 AM UTC, Brent wrote: On 12/21/2017 4:22 PM, agrays...@gmail.co

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/22/2017 6:31 AM, David Nyman wrote: On 22 Dec 2017 11:22, "Telmo Menezes" > wrote: On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 2:01 PM, David Nyman mailto:da...@davidnyman.com>> wrote: > On 21 December 2017 at 11:34, Telmo Menezes mailto:te...@telmomenezes.com>>

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/22/2017 4:50 PM, David Nyman wrote: On 22 Dec 2017 23:16, "Brent Meeker" <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/22/2017 6:31 AM, David Nyman wrote: On 22 Dec 2017 11:22, "Telmo Menezes" mailto:te...@telmomenezes.com>> wrote:

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/26/2017 6:22 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 22 Dec 2017, at 20:57, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/22/2017 2:25 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/21/2017 3:34 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: So we are told.  But what if someone could look at a

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/26/2017 6:48 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 23 Dec 2017, at 03:13, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/22/2017 4:50 PM, David Nyman wrote: On 22 Dec 2017 23:16, "Brent Meeker" <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/22/2017 6:31 AM, David Nyman wrote: O

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/26/2017 7:31 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 22 Dec 2017, at 11:25, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/21/2017 3:34 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: So we are told.  But what if someone could look at a recorded MRI of you brain and tell you

Re: did Jesus exist

"The whole religious complexion of the modern world is due to the absence from Jerusalem of a lunatic asylum."     --- Havelock Ellis On 12/26/2017 7:51 AM, Lawrence Crowell wrote: Written to somebody else: Jesus as portrayed in the Gospels most likely never actually existed. Jesus is a chara

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/26/2017 8:16 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 22 Dec 2017, at 15:31, David Nyman wrote: On 22 Dec 2017 11:22, "Telmo Menezes" > wrote: On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 2:01 PM, David Nyman mailto:da...@davidnyman.com>> wrote: > On 21 December 2017 at 11

Re: did Jesus exist

But were there many persons and many events, each one mythically embellished, and merged into one? Brent On 12/26/2017 9:38 AM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: Revisionist BS by Anne O'Reilly? You can attribute it to the author without being subject to crucifixion. So there was no Jesus, no dis

Re: What falsifiability tests has computationalism passed?

A good idea, but I don't see that these "predictions" of computationalism have actually been derived.  I think most of them are aspirational.  For example, what is the proof that spacetime is continuous - in fact what is the proof there is such a thing as spacetime? Brent On 12/26/2017 11:18

Re: What falsifiability tests has computationalism passed?

On 12/27/2017 12:44 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 27 Dec 2017, at 17:56, John Clark wrote: Computationalism is the idea that the brain is an ​ ​ information processing system and that a computer ​ ​ can ​ ​ perform all the complex behaviors that would be called intelligent if it were done by

Re: Cosmological Red Shift

Even as the universe expands there will still be a part of it which was close enough to us (in the distant past) that it is still within our visible universe. Brent On 12/27/2017 12:17 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: Since galaxies were formed after the CMB came into existence about 380,000

Re: Cosmological Red Shift

On 12/27/2017 1:22 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Wednesday, December 27, 2017 at 8:57:46 PM UTC, Brent wrote: Even as the universe expands there will still be a part of it which was close enough to us (in the distant past) that it is still within our visible universe.

Re: What falsifiability tests has computationalism passed?

So you think Bruno's theory fails because spacetime is discrete? However, gamma ray propagation from distant supernova show no dispersion, which implies that spacetime is smooth to severl orders of magnitude below the Planck scale. But either way the physics a cannot be compared to Bruno's th

Re: Cosmological Red Shift

On 12/27/2017 5:21 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Wednesday, December 27, 2017 at 3:43:05 PM UTC-7, Lawrence Crowell wrote: The CMB is composed of radiation with a black body distribution peaked at around 1000nm. The radiation is now in the microwave band at about 1 mm wa

Re: Page time and quantum error correction codes

I read it.  What I wonder is why failure of the equivalence principle implies a "fire wall"?  Does that mean a high-temperature?  I can imagine lots of ways the equivalence principle could fail. Brent On 12/29/2017 1:36 PM, Lawrence Crowell wrote: I am curious whether anybody looked at this. I

Re: Cosmological Red Shift

On 12/29/2017 9:26 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, December 29, 2017 at 7:45:41 PM UTC-7, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, December 29, 2017 at 6:59:22 AM UTC-7, Lawrence Crowell wrote: The cosmological constant is Λ ~ 10^{-52}cm^{-2} and the scale

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/30/2017 7:21 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 Dec 2017, at 21:48, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/26/2017 6:22 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 22 Dec 2017, at 20:57, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/22/2017 2:25 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Brent Meeker wrote: On

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/30/2017 7:41 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 Dec 2017, at 22:06, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/26/2017 6:48 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 23 Dec 2017, at 03:13, Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/22/2017 4:50 PM, David Nyman wrote: On 22 Dec 2017 23:16, "Brent Meeker" <

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/29/2017 4:51 PM, David Nyman wrote: On 23 December 2017 at 02:13, Brent Meeker <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/22/2017 4:50 PM, David Nyman wrote: On 22 Dec 2017 23:16, "Brent Meeker" mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On

Re: Dreamless Sleep?

On 12/30/2017 4:40 PM, David Nyman wrote: On 30 December 2017 at 23:38, Brent Meeker <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/29/2017 4:51 PM, David Nyman wrote: On 23 December 2017 at 02:13, Brent Meeker mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/

Re: What falsifiability tests has computationalism passed?

On 12/31/2017 7:46 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 27 Dec 2017, at 23:24, Brent Meeker wrote: So you think Bruno's theory fails because spacetime is discrete? However, gamma ray propagation from distant supernova show no dispersion, which implies that spacetime is smooth to severl order

Re: What falsifiability tests has computationalism passed?

On 12/31/2017 7:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Hint: "1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + ... = -1/12" can make sense. Only by redefining summation.  Infinite sums are notoriously order dependent.  It makes sense like 2+2=5 for extremely large values of 2. Brent -- You received this message because you are

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >