way.
If we reinstates the Anti-trust laws that worked before, and took them
further, then they wouldn't have as much influence in politics for Left or
Right, yes? So why does only the Left support something like that?
Craig
-Original Message-
From: Craig Weinberg whats
On Monday, December 17, 2012 9:41:13 AM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/17/2012 9:23 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Stamping out fear of every kind in the world is a worthy cause.
Wrong!
Fear of those things that will kill you is healthy. This is why
pain exists.
Then we
On Monday, December 17, 2012 9:47:28 AM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/17/2012 9:27 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
There are no neo-Marxists. Right wingers are the only people who talk
about Marx in this century.
Craig,
Really!?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki
I don't doubt it. He cut off one of his family for talking to Jamie Johnson
in that Rich Kids documentary too.
On Monday, December 17, 2012 9:55:15 AM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/17/2012 9:27 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Buffett is vocal about the rich not being taxed enough
You have it backwards Roger.
the most unequal society will be one in which a single person receives
100% of the total income and the remaining people receive none (*G* = 1);
and the most equal society will be one in which every person receives the
same income (*G* = 0).
On Monday, December 17, 2012 10:51:26 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
A strong militrary strengthens the dollar.
Ah, then the dollar should be stronger than then next ten currencies put
together.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/timeline
On Monday, December 17, 2012 10:55:03 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Actually the fourth commandment is to HONOR your parents.
You don't have to love them, just respect them for what they've
given you.
It is a parents job to give their kids what they can. If a person
On Monday, December 17, 2012 11:02:07 AM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/17/2012 10:55 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Actually the fourth commandment is to HONOR your parents.
You don't have to love them, just respect them for what they've
given you.
I
/2012 9:23 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Stamping out fear of every kind in the world is a worthy cause.
Wrong!
Fear of those things that will kill you is healthy. This is why
pain exists.
--
Onward!
Stephen
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
On Monday, December 17, 2012 1:08:33 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 12/17/2012 6:14 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Bankruptcy is the condition of owing more than you own. I think that in
the position the US is in,
Not even close. The reason other nations keep buying U.S. bonds at rates
so
On Monday, December 17, 2012 2:40:26 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/17/2012 1:33 PM, meekerdb wrote:
My complaint is that conservatives just lie, and assume we're all as
gullible as Rush Limbaugh's audience.
When g=1 all the wealth is owned by one person.
When g=0
On Monday, December 17, 2012 4:41:32 PM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
To try to clear up my mistaken interpretation of the gini coefficient,
namely that USA inequality is not decreasing, it is actually increasing,
I find that the per capita wealth is also increasing, so
let's see what effect that
How about this: Everyone gets their taxes cut in half, and then double that
half is collected in addition but only by those whose total incomes
increased and to the proportion that they increased from the previous year.
Seems fair to me.
On Monday, December 17, 2012 4:41:32 PM UTC-5, rclough
On Monday, December 17, 2012 5:57:40 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/17/2012 3:05 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Now that I know that Conservatism is based on preserving the value of
fear, it makes sense that the arguments tend to jump unexplainably
from hey, why is that one guy
On Monday, December 17, 2012 6:05:22 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/17/2012 3:29 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Hey!
Try this example of modern neo-marxists:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVWCYAchd7E
Boycotting a restaurant is Marxist? I would think that using free
On Tuesday, December 18, 2012 10:34:14 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Party politics will soon end.
The two parties of the future (next year if even that)
will be (a) those who want to cut the debt and
(b) those who don't.
That's what's happened to much of europe
that any one political system inherently
produces more progress, once you factor out the bonanza of natural
resources of the American continents.
Craig
2012/12/15 Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com javascript:
On Saturday, December 15, 2012 1:37:03 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote
On Tuesday, December 18, 2012 1:19:46 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/18/2012 11:54 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Tuesday, December 18, 2012 10:34:14 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Party politics will soon end.
The two parties of the future (next year
On Tuesday, December 18, 2012 2:30:48 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/18/2012 2:17 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Tuesday, December 18, 2012 1:19:46 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/18/2012 11:54 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Tuesday, December 18, 2012 10:34:14
On Monday, December 17, 2012 8:02:12 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/17/2012 5:11 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Taxing the rich does not redistribute the income, it adjusts the
expenses so that those who benefit disproportionately from the public
resources pay their share
On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 10:33:55 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Hal Ruhl
So whbat ? Those gini coefficnets are in percentages,
so USA has a gini about 27 %, which is outstanding.
If you don't that, see from the wikimedia
map (below) that the USA gini coeff.
is about about
On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 9:54:32 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
The difference between corporations and the govt
is that corps have to make a profit or they fail.
Govt never fails.
Governments fail all of the time.
The idea of American democracy was to factor
On Tuesday, December 18, 2012 5:04:28 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/18/2012 4:40 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Monday, December 17, 2012 8:02:12 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/17/2012 5:11 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Taxing the rich does not redistribute
On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 4:30:17 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/19/2012 2:43 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
All markets become first-come first-serve pyramid schemes by definition.
And this means? What is the implication?
That policies based on the assumption
On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 4:56:43 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/19/2012 3:50 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/19/2012 11:08 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 12/19/2012 1:42 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 12/19/2012 6:54 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 6:13:20 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 12/19/2012 2:01 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
But it isn't just money-under-the-table and campaign funding that
corrupts; it is also a huge think-tank industry and media empire that
supports politicians who vote to allow
On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 12:47:26 PM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
http://it.stlawu.edu/~pomo/mike/kuznet.html
The Kuznet's theory goes like this: when a country begins developing
economically,
its income inequality worsens. But after a few decades when
On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 11:09:31 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/19/2012 10:36 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Did you notice this chart on that link?
http://www.unc.edu/~nielsen/special/s2/hs12003a.gif
There is no shade of black that is white, sir. I know you mean
On Sunday, December 30, 2012 12:41:33 PM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
A Systems Theory Approach to the Mind/Body Problem (ver. 1)
The Black Box theory of Mind as given below suggests that the mind/body
problem
may be expressed analogously as a system theory in which mental
consciousness or
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Technically, any signal can be expressed either in time or frequency,
Do you mean wavelength or frequency? Time and frequency are the same
thing. Cycles per unit time (or time cycles per unit
On Monday, December 31, 2012 8:20:44 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 31 Dec 2012, at 14:05, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal and Brian,
Bigness can only limit physical entities (those extended in space),
but is irrelevant with regard to nonphysical or mental entities,
as
On Tuesday, January 1, 2013 10:08:36 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
A Theology for Atheists
There are two opposing forces in the universe, those which enhance
life, which we call Good, and those which diminish life, which we call
Evil.
Enhance whose life though? Would slavery Good or Evil?
On Tuesday, January 1, 2013 4:14:18 PM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
CRAIG: Enhance whose life though?
ROGER: Anybody's life.
Disinfectants destroy microbiotic life.
CRAIG: Would slavery Good or Evil?
ROGER: The masters diminish the life of the slaves
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dlBROdVjjI
Same as mine, really, except I use the concept of 'sense' rather than
'spirit'.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
On Tuesday, January 1, 2013 4:05:15 PM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
The evolution of good and evil
There are two opposing forces in the universe, those which enhance
life, which we call Good, and those which diminish life, which we call
Evil.
I can't really relate to cut and dried ideas
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 6:29:55 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
So what's good for one may be evil for another.
No surprise there. That's why an overriding
referee or judge (God) is necessary.
Why would the relativity of value necessitate some kind of referee? Any
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 6:39:17 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
ROGER: There are two opposing forces in the universe, those which enhance
life, which we call Good, and those which diminish life, which we call
Evil.
CRAIG: I can't relate to cut and dried ideas of Good and Evil or
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 12:57:34 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 02 Jan 2013, at 02:01, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Chemotherapy Good or Evil?
Better than nothing for most people having some disease.
Worst than THC injection, plausibly for the same group of people.
Here the Evil
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 3:05:10 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/2/2013 11:13 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 12:57:34 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 02 Jan 2013, at 02:01, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Chemotherapy Good or Evil?
Better than nothing
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 7:08:41 AM UTC-5, telmo_menezes wrote:
In my opinion, good and evil are just names we attach to brain processes
we all have in common. These brain processes make us pursue the best
interest of society instead of our own self-interest. I believe they have
two
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 3:58:45 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/2/2013 12:46 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 3:05:10 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/2/2013 11:13 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 12:57:34 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 4:12:38 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/2/2013 1:06 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 3:58:45 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/2/2013 12:46 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 3:05:10 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 8:13:20 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Why bad things happen to good people--Leibniz's Theodicy
This is because things can't be good
everywhere at the same time. Thus evil and catastrophes are
probabilistic.
Why not? If evil and catastrophes are
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 6:21:27 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/2/2013 2:24 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
That really has nothing to do with Evil though, except in sloppy
reasoning. True Evil is about intentionally initiating social harm. Getting
smallpox is not evil, it is just
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 9:11:07 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/2/2013 5:24 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 6:21:27 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/2/2013 2:24 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
That really has nothing to do with Evil though, except in sloppy
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 5:35:00 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Do you know anything about jurisprudence ?
Only as much as you do.
It doesn't care
if your motivations were good or evil, it only cares if you
broke the law or not.
Did I contradict that somewhere
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 6:06:42 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
It doesn't matter whether you have good or bad intentions.
The law and God judge us by what we do. You do the crime,
you do the time.
I'll let the Bible speak for itself, if that is the God you
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 5:53:56 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Tsunamis and other forces of nature are themselves amoral*, but
their effects can be good (enhance life) or evil (diminish life).
Are you saying that God is powerless to change nature?
*Since God
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 10:44:17 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Telmo Menezes
Sheldrake's been criticized in such a fashion for many of his results
(there are a huge number of other types of observations) but I simply
trust that he's not deceiving us. My reason is that materialists
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 9:04:39 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Evil is not defined by law, but crime is.
I ask again, Did I contradict that somewhere?
[Roger Clough], [rcl...@verizon.net] javascript:
1/3/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 9:11:29 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
All of your quotes are very good advice.
What's your point ?
My point is that any worthwhile religion is very much concerned with
intentions and the content of your 'heart', at least as much as whether
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 6:14:41 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
If you jump off of a building, gravity will kill you.
Is that God's fault ? IMHO since God created
nature, he also created the natural forces, which
cause tsunamis. God is lawful, so He follows his
own
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 10:45:01 AM UTC-5, yanniru wrote:
BTW my stichk is that consciousness
comes from discrete compactified space that is arithmetic, in both the
megaverse and in each universe.
Richard
Why would consciousness come from discrete compactified space? To me, all
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 5:22:24 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Enhancing Life is not a very arbitrary value,
I don't know about arbitrary, but it is a very nebulous value. What does
the enhancement of life consist of? The growth of bacteria? The improvement
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 12:16:36 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 02 Jan 2013, at 20:13, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 12:57:34 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 02 Jan 2013, at 02:01, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Chemotherapy Good or Evil?
Better than nothing
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 5:44:32 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Chemotherapy is generally thought to be evil to the cancer
(it tries to kill it) and good to the patient (it tries ultimately to
cure him through killing the cancer).
While chemotherapy works against the cancer, on the
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 1:14:15 PM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Rupert Sheldrake - The Morphogenetic Universe
What is space ?
Space is the experience of gaps between public presences, or alternatively
the distance which can be measured of one object against another.
There is no such
On Friday, January 4, 2013 3:09:11 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
You're right, I was thinking as a jew might, but if orgot that jesus
introduced the
concept of thought crimes (intentions).
I was thinking as a jew might,
lol
[Roger Clough], [rcl...@verizon.net
On Friday, January 4, 2013 12:48:19 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 Stephen P. King step...@charter.net javascript:wrote:
So how ever many years ago you there confident that CERN would discover
the Higgs?
About 15, and in not one of those 15 years would I have
On Saturday, January 5, 2013 10:43:32 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Subjective states can somehow be extracted from brains via a computer.
No, they can't.
The ingenius folks who were miraculously able to extract an image from the
brain
that we saw recently
On Saturday, January 5, 2013 11:05:24 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com javascript:wrote:
That's like betting that the Catholic Church won't make Martin Luther a
saint again this year.
I don't see the analogy.
I'm not surprised
On Saturday, January 5, 2013 7:10:13 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 03 Jan 2013, at 18:13, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 10:45:01 AM UTC-5, yanniru wrote:
BTW my stichk is that consciousness
comes from discrete compactified space that is arithmetic, in both
I think that there is no literal field. Self-organization requires only a
capacity to experience and effect change. When a car breaks down, there is
no field of organization which is going to appear and fix it - the car is
fixed by the sensory-motor capacities of the car's owner and nothing
On Saturday, January 5, 2013 4:28:30 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Craig Weinberg
whats...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
You mean that physicists have been given 10 billion dollars to spend on
particle accelerators (and comfortable salaries as well, among
On Monday, January 7, 2013 6:19:33 AM UTC-5, telmo_menezes wrote:
On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Roger Clough rcl...@verizon.netjavascript:
wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Sorry, everybody, I was snookered into believing that they had really
accomplished the impossible.
So you
On Monday, January 7, 2013 7:24:24 PM UTC-5, telmo_menezes wrote:
Hi Craig,
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 12:41 AM, Craig Weinberg
whats...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
On Monday, January 7, 2013 6:19:33 AM UTC-5, telmo_menezes wrote:
On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Roger Clough rcl
On Tuesday, January 8, 2013 5:23:55 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Telmo Menezes
Presumably the brain works with analog, not digital, signals.
You are both missing the more important issue - signals cannot be decoded
in the brain. It's tempting to think that is possible because we are
On Saturday, January 5, 2013 8:47:14 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/5/2013 5:39 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
The easy problem is harder than the hard problem in the sense that it is
the long way around.
No, it's harder because you can tell when you've failed.
Brent
It's not hard for me
On Sunday, January 6, 2013 1:24:48 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote:
On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com javascript:wrote:
Even people who have no sense of humor can deduce that other people do
have it,
Would they if only 0.001% of the population had a sense of humor
On Tuesday, January 8, 2013 12:37:47 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/8/2013 6:36 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Saturday, January 5, 2013 8:47:14 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/5/2013 5:39 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
The easy problem is harder than the hard problem in the sense
On Tuesday, January 8, 2013 1:27:20 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote:
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com
javascript:wrote:
unlike psi it would be easily repeatable, if one person who claimed to
have a sense of humor laughed and said that was a very good joke
On Wednesday, January 9, 2013 6:18:37 AM UTC-5, telmo_menezes wrote:
Hi Craig,
Cool. I actually would have agreed with you and a lot of people here at
different times in my life. It's only been lately in the last five years or
so that I have put together this other way of
The problem, in my view, is the term physical.
*http://www.thefreedictionary.com/physical*
1.* a. * Of or relating to the body as distinguished from the mind or
spirit. See Synonyms at bodily http://www.thefreedictionary.com/bodily.
* b. * Involving or characterized by vigorous bodily
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 11:47:26 AM UTC-5, yanniru wrote:
But in the end the magic of consciousness
requires a 1p leap of faith.
And vice versa.That's because they are the same thing. Consciousness is
literally a leap across mechanism, computation, and physics. That is what
free
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 12:42:06 PM UTC-5, yanniru wrote:
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Craig Weinberg
whats...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 11:47:26 AM UTC-5, yanniru wrote:
But in the end the magic of consciousness
requires
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 5:06:25 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
I appear to be wrong about the aether, according to a physicist
friend of mine, and the lastest physics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_theories
Apparently the Michaelson-Morley experiment has been explained
as topological
bodies. Integers and arithmetic operators represent the sensory-motor
relations of public objects as private logical figures.
Craig
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Craig Weinberg
whats...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
On Wednesday, January 9, 2013 6:18:37 AM UTC-5, telmo_menezes wrote
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 7:33:06 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/10/2013 4:23 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Do you think there can be something that is intelligent but not complex
(and use whatever definitions of intelligent and complex you want).
A thermostat is much less complex
On Friday, January 11, 2013 12:27:54 AM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/10/2013 9:20 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 7:33:06 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/10/2013 4:23 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Do you think there can be something that is intelligent but not complex
On Friday, January 11, 2013 12:02:57 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at Roger Clough rcl...@verizon.net javascript:wrote:
So either there's no ether, or light has a fixed velocity.
No, light has a fixed velocity with or without the aether, it's a
experimental result
On Friday, January 11, 2013 2:02:40 PM UTC-5, yanniru wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Craig Weinberg
whats...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
On Friday, January 11, 2013 12:02:57 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at Roger Clough rcl...@verizon.net wrote
On Friday, January 11, 2013 4:45:39 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/11/2013 12:13 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
What we call light is a visual experience. EM radiation below the visible
range is felt as heat. This means that the entirety of the character of the
EM is defined by the receiver
On Friday, January 11, 2013 5:45:19 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/11/2013 2:25 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Friday, January 11, 2013 4:45:39 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/11/2013 12:13 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
What we call light is a visual experience. EM radiation below the visible
On Saturday, January 12, 2013 10:33:11 AM UTC-5, yanniru wrote:
EM waves and fields clearly exist in spacetime.
How do you know that they don't exist in matter?
Yet I would classify
them along with quantum waves as part of the quantum mind and
nonphysical.
I don't see anything as
On Sunday, January 13, 2013 7:56:25 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Richard Ruquist
EM waves are physical and exist in spacetime.
You can capture them with an antenna, etc.
Does an Earthquake capture a wave that is independent of the Earth?
From my view, the EM waves *are* the
On Saturday, January 12, 2013 11:34:37 PM UTC-5, yanniru wrote:
Craig,
You sound like the ultimate flower girl, all touchy and feelie.
However, yo might very well be right.
Richard
Mother nature's son?
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Craig Weinberg
whats...@gmail.comjavascript
On Sunday, January 13, 2013 11:57:48 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 12 Jan 2013, at 13:01, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Hi Roger,
How can you have a wave without some notion of spatial/temporal dimensions?
I don't see why we cannot have purely mathematical waves (easily related
to lines
- Physics - Chemistry - Biology - Efferent Motive - *Sense* -^
Afferent Feeling ^ Awareness ^ Consciousness ^ Cognition ^ Theology ^
Philosophy ^ Logic ^ Math -
On Saturday, January 12, 2013 7:48:13 AM UTC-5, Alberto G.Corona wrote:
Space and time may be a perception of the mind in the
On Monday, January 14, 2013 7:06:57 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Why not ? There are gravitational waves.
How do you know there are gravitational waves?
But earthquakes usually initiate waves
by the sudden release of potential energy.
Potential energy
On Monday, January 14, 2013 12:11:58 PM UTC-5, yanniru wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Bruno Marchal
mar...@ulb.ac.bejavascript:
wrote:
On 13 Jan 2013, at 05:34, Richard Ruquist wrote:
That's because they don't consider that matter is inherently
sensitive.
I do. In
On Monday, January 14, 2013 1:50:24 PM UTC-5, yanniru wrote:
I speak of a 4 dimensional semi-infinite block universe that may be
the universally accessible storage of everything that ever happened,,
with calculations of every possibility for the future semi-infinity
(in my
I don't really see much of a difference whether we talk about BECs,
strings, charged geometries, vacuum flux, aether, numbers, or any other
spatially structured medium. Who cares? The question is how does that begin
to know about something and to care about it?
On Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Wouldn't it also sort of mean that you can't die in your sleep? Why do
we keep waking up in the same life when we could just as easily jump
to a different one? What if the experience of being completely asleep
continued forever without you ever knowing whether or not you had
survived your friends
On May 20, 1:15 am, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
You only split when some quantum event gets amplified to make a
macroscopic, i.e.
quasi-classical, difference. Otherwise Craig Weinberg is a somewhat fuzzy
operator
projecting onto a lot of slight different, but classically
On May 20, 1:49 pm, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote:
All free will means is any change made because you wanted to.
That would be fine except I know that is NOT all you believe free will
means because I know
On May 21, 10:47 am, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 20, 2012 PM Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
Free means it is not imposed onto you. It is free because the choice was
made by you.
I have no problem with that and I have no problem with the word will; its
On May 21, 7:44 pm, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 4:00 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
In a branching multiverse where all possibilities happen at a decision
point, some versions of you decide to type the sentence and others do
On May 22, 12:49 pm, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote:
In addition to approving of one presented option and disapproving of
another,
Approved for a reason or approved for no reason.
right
free will allows
On May 23, 1:54 pm, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 22, 2012 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
Nominated for a reason or nominated for no reason.
Wrong. I am doing the nominating.
You are doing the nominating for a reason or you are doing the nominating
On May 23, 10:05 pm, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 5:28 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
There is obviously at least a small probability that you will decide
to sleep under a bush tonight.
Only because of how we have defined
301 - 400 of 3100 matches
Mail list logo
