1 Cal is about 4.2 kJ.
What do they teach in schools these days?
Cheers
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics
the interpretation of an observer. From that, comes bits, and all the
other information-based quantities.
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coder
ever acknowledged Bruno's result.
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
Univer
s,
all you are doing is expanding physics to describe observers, the
process of observation, and abstract things like "semantics".
--
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal
Maybe not...)
Actually, principle, we should be able to surpass plants in
efficiency. Plants are only about 10% efficient, IIRC, and the best
artificial photosynthetic cell to date is only about half that.
Cheers
--
----
Pr
g a case
in point), but can recommend the classic by Misner, Thorne and
Wheeler, who got it right.
Cheers
--
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of
erious p-time.
Cheers
--
----
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
University of New South Wales http
tem B, or something else
entirely different again ends up being greater than or equal to 2.
So maybe you can give meaning to your measure, but it aint probability
as we known it.
--
----
Prof Russell Standish
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 08:53:23PM -0800, meekerdb wrote:
> On 2/19/2014 8:44 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
> >On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 08:06:31PM -0800, meekerdb wrote:
> >>I think we're talking past one another. You're talking about
> >>ontology as the ur-s
theories these
would b called the axioms. It looks like in some circumstances,
"ontology" refers to these collections.
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High P
ct
> computational information.
>
No, the question is what is phenomena, and what is its nature. That's
what counts, ultimately. All else is theories, speculations,
stories. Some more usful than others.
--
decohered, and that there is a matter of fact about whether the
coin is there, even if we don't know it. I just happen to disagree
with Deutsch, and can think of no experiment to distinguish whether
he's right or I'm right.
--
-
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 02:34:57PM +1300, LizR wrote:
> On 19/02/2014, Russell Standish wrote:
> >
> > Which ones? How can unobserved facts exist?
>
> You can observe their consequences without observing the facts. E.g.
> millions of people have observed tha
ontology is unknowable, and not even really meaningful in any sense.
Cheers
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 12:39:59AM +, David Nyman wrote:
> On 19 February 2014 00:15, Russell Standish wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:22:55PM +, David Nyman wrote:
> > > On 18 February 2014 22:34, Russell Standish
> > wrote:
> > >
> >
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 04:19:33PM -0800, meekerdb wrote:
> On 2/17/2014 10:15 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
> >On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 09:18:32PM -0800, meekerdb wrote:
>
> I don't think there's any difference between objectivity and
> inter-subujective ag
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 11:57:21AM +1300, LizR wrote:
> On 19/02/2014, Russell Standish wrote:
> >
> > In which theory? IIUC, acceleration of an infinitesimal point particle
> > does not change the curvature of space. And acceleration of a massive
> > particle only c
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:22:55PM +, David Nyman wrote:
> On 18 February 2014 22:34, Russell Standish wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 02:06:37PM +, David Nyman wrote:
> > >
> > > I must admit it hasn't been entirely clear to me why you decided t
ion is probably because as far as evolution is concerned, they
are the one and same.
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathemat
ounterfactuals are irrelevent to supervenience.
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.
ems like you might be saying that the acceleration does curve space
> >
>
> Yes.
>
In which theory? IIUC, acceleration of an infinitesimal point particle
does not change the curvature of space. And acceleration of a massive
particle only changes the curvature by the amount due to the
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 09:18:32PM -0800, meekerdb wrote:
> On 2/17/2014 8:58 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
> >On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 07:30:23PM -0800, meekerdb wrote:
> >>But there is a weaker form. However unlikely one thinks strings or
> >>singularities or multipl
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 07:30:23PM -0800, meekerdb wrote:
> On 2/17/2014 7:09 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
> >On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 06:32:35PM -0800, meekerdb wrote:
> >>On 2/17/2014 5:21 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
> >>>On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 02:03:49PM -0800, meek
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 06:32:35PM -0800, meekerdb wrote:
> On 2/17/2014 5:21 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
> >On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 02:03:49PM -0800, meekerdb wrote:
> >>On 2/17/2014 1:55 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
> >>>On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 05:33:48AM -0800, Edga
ommunicate. They don't survive to teach their young anything, so
> their ability to learn is partially wasted.
>
Exactly.
--
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Princip
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 02:03:49PM -0800, meekerdb wrote:
> On 2/17/2014 1:55 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
> >On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 05:33:48AM -0800, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
> >>Russell,
> >>
> >>All of science assumes an external reality independent of human
hat phenomena. But it is not direct evidence of an independent reality.
--
----
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpc
etely different universe of the multiverse shares just the
Schroedinger equation. And so on..
I don't understand your questions about "creation" here.
--
----
Prof Russell Standish Phone 042
-------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcod
f reality, which they mistake for actual human
> > > independent reality.
> >
> Russell STandish asked:
> >
> > What evidence do you offer for this assumption?
> >
--
Prof Russell Stand
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matiyasevich's_theorem#Matiyasevich.27s_theorem
Cheers
--
----
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematic
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 09:30:52PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> On 14 Feb 2014, at 05:42, meekerdb wrote:
>
> >On 2/13/2014 8:40 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
> >>I had a look at your SANE paper, which is the main paper where
> >>you describe
> >>your
> On 14 Feb 2014, at 05:40, Russell Standish wrote:
>
> >thesis. This doesn't bother me - if you ever bothered to read my
> >thesis (not that I'm recommending you do so), you would find it
> >consists of two faily different topics, with only the most tenuous
&
email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
-
ey exhibit a second order theory of the mind, which may
well be sufficient for consciousness.
Cheers
--
----
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Profe
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 04:23:00PM +1300, LizR wrote:
> On 14 February 2014 15:40, Russell Standish wrote:
>
> > > And it implies there was no reality before humans.
> >
> > If by "human" you mean observers in general, then yes - it does imply
> >
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 10:42:21AM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> On 13 Feb 2014, at 05:38, Russell Standish wrote:
>
> >On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 12:24:18PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> >>
> >>On 12 Feb 2014, at 02:02, Russell Standish wrote:
> >>
>
form is F=dp/dt, where p is the 3
momentum of the object under consideration. F=ma is its low velocity
approximation.
So I would be surprised if COMP fails to prove Newton's second law -
it would mean someone was using terminology inconsistently.
Cheers
--
--
; >
> > > So doesn't this mean acceleration should also curve space? If not, why
> > not?
> > >
> >
> > Motion through curved space appears as acceleration in a flat tangent
> > space.
> >
> > > If not, doesn't that violate t
dependent.
>
> That's a fundamental and deadly mistake in trying to make sense of
> reality...
>
Actually, it has rather a lot of advantages for understanding as
compared with the alternatives.
--
---
;t that violate the Equivalence Principle?
No.
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
University of New
------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
Un
nciple either. Bruno would say it
is necessary for the manifestation of other conciousnesses to us. I
reserve my judgement on this...
--
----
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 12:24:18PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> On 12 Feb 2014, at 02:02, Russell Standish wrote:
>
> >On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 07:31:24PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> >>
> >>You are right, the qualia are in X1* \ X1, like we get quanta in
s comment of 11/2/14.
Cheers
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
University of
rgument.
I'm not yet convinced it is a genuine problem for step 8, or not, as I still
don't feel I fully understand what that says yet.
Cheers
--
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principa
G*\G thing), but that's not the same as qualia ISTM.
Cheers
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
dovetailer. This is
the essence of the UDA.
2) Even if it were a direct compution of reality a la Wolfram, an
asyncronously updating parallel computer need not have a matter of
fact to whether A is computed before B, just so long as the
relativistic causal structure is preserved.
Cheers
--
and
sphericity for that matter) to account for gravitational
phenomena. This may be related to Brent's comments...
Cheers
--
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performan
you connect the clock speed of your hypothetical
computer with the curvature of spacetime?
--
----
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professo
eed it is required
for my TIME postulate, although I would argue that the past light cone
is probably a more useful concept than a spacelike foliation. The
problem is with an intersubjective present moment, such as Edgar seems
to be promoting, which is not compatible with relativity.
Cheers
--
---
wing list.
By the same token, the thread is strictly speaking, off topic. But you
are always welcome to ignore the whole thread.
--
----
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Per
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 02:19:20PM +1300, LizR wrote:
> On 6 February 2014 14:16, Russell Standish wrote:
>
> > I don't know. I suspect Liz was being a little overeager in
> >
> attributing 1p phenomena to the explanatory reach of the block
> > universe
sciousness.
Nevertheless, within the framework of the block universe, there is no
movement, as such, of any entity within spacetime. Of that, there is
no disagreement.
Cheers
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish P
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 01:20:36PM +1300, LizR wrote:
> On 6 February 2014 13:16, Russell Standish wrote:
>
> >
> > That is exactly why I say a BU can never describe consciousness.
> >
>
> Is that specifically a BU, or any form of materialism?
>
Materialism
yde. Only a
> Frankenstein would claim that it lives or could be reanimated!
>
> Edgar
>
That is exactly why I say a BU can never describe consciousness.
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 042
cribes reality, in which case you have
eliminated consciousness as a phenomena to be described
(eliminativism).
Whichever way you fall, there is still no contradiction.
--
----
Prof Russell Standish Phon
this in the form of "imaginary time".
--
----
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
University of New S
e that makes it
> > > seem like something moves when nothing actually does, though of course
> > no
> > > one can explain why or how
> > >
> > > Edgar
> > >
> > >
>
opinion, just
a (to me anyway) fairly minor corrrection of sloppy language.
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcode
ine described by the block universe
picture. Same mathematical object. It does not falsify the block universe.
--
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 11:42:43AM +1300, LizR wrote:
> On 6 February 2014 11:34, Russell Standish wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 11:05:22AM +1300, LizR wrote:
> > > On 6 February 2014 10:41, Russell Standish
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> &
othing actually does, though of course no
> one can explain why or how
>
> Edgar
>
>
>
--
----
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Vis
ding, IIUC. It sounds more like your
understanding prior to your recent "clarification".
Cheers
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Pr
s statement was in error. Let's move on.
Cheers
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
University o
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 11:05:22AM +1300, LizR wrote:
> On 6 February 2014 10:41, Russell Standish wrote:
>
> >
> > But where Edgar went wrong was to suggest that this implies that all
> > points along a path traced out an object moving through space time
> >
&
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 04:21:47PM -0500, Jesse Mazer wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 07:53:16AM -0800, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
> > >
> > > In fact relativity itself conclusively falsifies block time as it
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 02:57:15PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> On 05 Feb 2014, at 02:37, Russell Standish wrote:
>
> >
> >I understand that Bp&Dt gives one of von Neumann's quantum logics, but
> >it still seems an enormous jump from there to the FPI,
>
ed in metres per second.
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
University of New So
(Tegmark may call this the minimal information
principle, IIRC), which is really the subject of chapters 2 & 3 of my book.
Cheers
>
> On 5 February 2014 17:58, wrote:
>
> >
> > On Wednesday, February 5, 2014 1:45:18 AM UTC, Russell Standish wrote:
> >>
> >&
uggestions to my list.
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
University of New South Wales http:
ional to the volume of the Hubble sphere?
>
> (Although I guess the multiverse probably contains way more info than
> that...)
>
Rather less, I would expect, for the reasons outlined in "Theory of Nothing..."
--
----
On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 12:36:15PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> On 04 Feb 2014, at 06:49, Russell Standish wrote:
>
> >On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 08:40:59AM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> >>
> >>Then explain why you don't read the UDA, or why you don't r
gt; 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 eve
ore it requires a storage medium, whether they be wax cylinders, or
modern MP3 data files on flash media.
> 5-1000 think about alll the rest what we do not even think of today
We have to think about it today, otherwise it is lost tomorrow.
>
> John Mikes
>
>
> On Mon, Fe
bed 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.
>
On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 10:16:15PM -0800, meekerdb wrote:
> On 2/3/2014 10:00 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
> >On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 12:44:57PM -0800, meekerdb wrote:
> >>Layzer of course didn't know about the holographic principle, which
> >>implies that the maxim
ever write this up somewhere?
Cheers
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
University of New South Wale
-------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
University of New South Wales
against the anthropic explanation for the low value of the
> cosmological constant.
>
Where are all the "metals" (elements heavier than Boron) supposed
to come from to form these rocky planets?
Cheers
--
--------
ransferring my CD/DVDRom collection to spinning disk - only
just in time I suspect.
Cheers
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Profes
ry long time ago started a FAQ for the list but the
> project died.
>
>
>
> Hal Ruhl
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
>
> From: *everything-list@googlegroups.com* [
> *mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com* ]
> On Behalf Of Russell Standish
>
construction. But that correspondence is not unique, as I mentioned.
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco
R there is a differnt
bijection for each different inertial reference frame.
--
----
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathemati
saged, but Lerner does not make much of a
case against it. In fact, a great deal of what he
discusses in his book, like cosmic plasma phenomena, is
perfectly consistent with the big bang. He could have
used the same material had he decided to write "The
Big Bang Happened!"
--
ce
> > and time.
> >
> > Rightly or wrongly, that’s a trade off that many will find hard. Let’s
> > hope Shu sticks to his guns, if only for the sake of good old-fashioned
> > debate
> >
> > Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1007.1750: Cosmological Models with No Big Bang
On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 12:07:08PM +1300, LizR wrote:
> On 30 January 2014 12:11, Russell Standish wrote:
>
> > Yes. Pity the poor blighters at high school if someone tried to teach
> > them this stuff. I remember someone once showed me the definition of
> > continuity
has just blown a fuse.
--
----
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
University of New Sou
On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 11:57:12AM +1300, LizR wrote:
> On 30 January 2014 11:56, Russell Standish wrote:
>
> >
> > It's the concept of Cesaro 1-summability that I was dimly recalling
> > (page 125), but on page 126, it appears the same result is achieved by
> &
h is the value of -1/6
that's been quoted.
It's one of those funny little topics taught in second year maths
without any context, and which is almost immediately forgotten as
useless.
Cheers
On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 10:57:21AM +1300, LizR wrote:
> On 30 January 2014 10:28, Russe
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
-
rything 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 http://groups.google.com/
ation \psi(t) given
initial conditions \psi(0) is a block multiverse.
Even a solution to the Wheeler-de Witt equation (which is time
independent) could be said to be a block multiverse.
Cheers
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 06:35:16PM -0800, meekerdb wrote:
> On 1/24/2014 2:58 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
> >Indeed - with my derivation of QM, octonions, or more general measure
> >are preferred over the complex. Which naturally leads to the question
> >of why complex. Eit
be
fascinating!
Cheers
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
University of New South Wales ht
ce if a christian asks me whether I believe in God, I say no, and
if a philsopher asks me, I say "that depends on what you mean by
God". Heaven forbid I should meet a christian philosopher, though. Do
such fabled beasts exist?
--
------
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 04:27:50PM +1300, LizR wrote:
> On 24 January 2014 12:41, Russell Standish wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 04:32:47PM -0500, Stephen Paul King wrote:
> > >
> > > I can not read your book now. My stack of must read materials is already
&
e this problem.
--
----
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
University of New South Wales http://www.h
ing universal.
> So that RE set
>
What is a Turing complete _set_?
--
--------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders
ee Will" is the inability to predict your own actions even in a
> stable environment.
I'm glad we agree on this (not the almost never used part, I've always
used it this way :).
> 2) "Free Will" is a noise made by the mouth.
>
----
801 - 900 of 2356 matches
Mail list logo
