Re: My name is Tidus...what's your name :)

[Stephen Lin]

Rikku, Yuna, Paine? Are you there/??


On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:07 AM, Stephen Lin  wrote:

>
>

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Fwd: The neuroelectric st

[Stephen Lin]

"Wisdom is the art of coming up with believable excuses for one's
ignorance."

This is my excuse...

-- Forwarded message ------
From: Stephen Lin 
Date: Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 7:58 AM
Subject: The neuroelectric st
To:: Evan,  Nadav

Hi guys,

Sorry about what happened this week: missing work, sending strange e-mails,
and all. I'm much more lucid now so I can explain better what I meant by my
previous e-mals.  Basically, I think, for some reason beyond my control, I
have this neuroelectric storm going on in my brain that I can't really
control and that accelerates the more and more I think about interesting
ideas (like John McCalls' witness tables). It has nothing to do with anger
or getting mad at people, it just is what it is  and it will pass when it
passes.

I'm going to try to get back to normality as soon as possible but It's hard
because even concentrating on typing words takes effort. I think what I
might need to do is find a good neurologist. When that's over with, I'll go
back to work and it'll be as if nothing every happened, ok?

Thank you again so much,
Stephen

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: String theory and superconductors and classical liquids...

[Stephen Lin]

Try changing directions now. Here's a hint:


  Your soul is oftentimes a battlefield earth, water, fire, and sky people
from the planet with no green left without the singular solution.

I can't help thinking is pinking the blank slate magazines of red books of
communal baths with gladiators and do you hear my heart beating?

Life goes on and off the beaten path of the travelling salesman
isomorphically to the problems of the physically intimate universal couples.

I send my thoughts to far off destinations finally we can rest away from
maddening crowds so you can discover truth from filthy lies.

Everybody's changing at the speed of causality and the threads cannot be
undone except by circling them faster and knotting not the needy.

Everybody waits for you now when he reached the foot of the hillside
hospital we wondered why he was that he was truly a mystery of life.

Were you wanting me like I wanted your blood and my blood is naught but the
sap that feeds the tree of heavenly union of blessed souls.

All the world's a stage manager but away in a manger was the play the
invention of the humanity even modulo any belief in angels or demons.

When you say that we were wrong life goes on and off to the racetrack like
the horses we watched galloping like there was no yesterday.

Out of nothing we embrace the ashes of eternity until the phoenix rises
from the gray wolf's companionship is the greatest union of all.

This is why we can't have nice to meet you and others from the planet of
the tubes which cannot give you eternal life, only subtle messages.

There's a lot that we can give little when you give of your possessive
particles of atomic matter so tomorrow we give away all the strings.

Three two one singular matrix in which you would watch with serenity to
accept the things one cannot change the future's past reproducing.

Let them see you smile and a tears for fears of the unknown soldier so rise
and repeat yourself for the sake of brevity brave one two three.

The things you have fashioned in necessity and delighted to see you old
friend from before the days of yore when clothes fit like gloves.

Sand and foam parties surprising you at the end of time and spacemen
wondering if it started with a low light or maybe just a beached whale.

I would that my life were a tear and a smile like you mean it you killer
rabbit holes through which you will never follow until the sadness.

You would accept the seasons of your heart will go on through the night of
the living social security mechanism for the winter of our lives.

They too are gatherers of fruit and Frankenfoods blathering about the
genetic manipulation of mice and men until the singularity of genes.

Who shall command the skylark not to sing of his glory the Hypnotoad and
the green frogs resume questioning the princesses tonight they say.

See that no one has gone his way with empty hands clapping the sound of
which is louder than one hand given in friendship shaking alone.

You give little when you give of your magi are the weakest class at the
beginning of the game but quickly ascend the heights to circularity.

Your hearts know in silence of the lamb chop suey from the Chinese room
within the bolting brains of the lighting bugs compared to humans.

Bows from which your children are living in the shell games played by con
artists wondering what the point of reproduction and sentience is.

My heart will go on to the next existence without my central nervously
awaiting the arrival of the first man in the matrix of singularities.

Whenever you will go away from here and come back when you're ready steady
rock and troll beneath the bridge of forever. Enterprise? Yes.

I still haven't found what I'm looking through the spyglass entertainment
systems of the down by the bayou until we find Finn, again.

Finn again's wakefulness yields the sleepy tiger waiting for its meal on
the infinite plain of measurably zero gazelles and striped zebras.

Digitized you inside a turtle in a half-shell of the sixth sense of
inverted symmetry between observer and observed quantum states of mind.

Don't hate the player, hate the game theory yielding conspiracies in the
beautiful mind of a gladiator asking if you are entertained.

What's it really for loops to see plus the plus until the template of
perfect recursion arrives from the land of the syntactic sugar plums.

Let it come all cozy into viewfinder's keeper of the floating mountains
kept afloat by unobtainium. Jake? Eywa has heard you.

Slow down your passion fire in the belly buttons pushing the red ones until
we all say that was easy peasy. Time again? Gulp. Maybe? Yes!

Some other time again? Well well well! It's always about the non-linearity
of dreaming time, like the butterfly effect. Unicorns! Chaos.

Send me a funny poet some other time we should sent one the first time but
forgive us for the small steps and the fear of the unknown. Con?

Live hallucination within a dream within a dream of the philosopher-

Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article

[Stephen Lin]

So this remembering nowhow about science till win every battle, but
religion wan the way before it even began. Wold you agree MATT DAMON? DON"T
BLOW THE MEET WITH MATSUI) :)


On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:10 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Telmo Menezes 
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:05 PM, meekerdb  wrote:
> >> On 10/24/2013 12:08 PM, John Mikes wrote:
> >>
> >> Craig and Telmo:
> >> Is "anticipation" involved at all? Deep Blue anticipated hundreds of
> steps
> >> in advance (and evaluated a potential outcome before accepting, or
> >> rejecting).
> >> What else is in "thinking" involved? I would like to know, because I
> have no
> >> idea.
> >> John Mikes
> >>
> >>
> >> Learning from experience.  Actually I think Deep Blue could do some
> learning
> >> by analyzing games and adjusting the values it gave to positions.  But
> one
> >> reason it seems so unintelligent is that its scope of perception is very
> >> narrow (i.e. chess games) and so it can't learn some things a human
> player
> >> can.  For example Deep Blue couldn't see Kasparov look nervous, ask for
> >> changes in the lighting, hesitate slightly before moving a piece,...
> >
> > Bret,
>
> Sorry I misspelled your name! A quick google search shows me that it's
> not something offensive, just another name. Uff... :)
>
> >
> > Even in the narrow domain of chess this sort of limitation still
> > applies. Part of it comes from the "divide and conquer" approach
> > followed by conventional engineering. Let's consider a simplification
> > of what the Deep Blue architecture looks like:
> >
> > - Pieces have some values, this is probably sophisticated and the
> > values can be influenced by overall board structure;
> > - Some function can evaluate the utility of a board configuration;
> > - A search tree is used to explore the space of possible plays,
> > counter-plays, counter-counter-plays and so on;
> > - The previous tree can be pruned using some heuristics, but it's
> > still gigantic;
> > - The more computational power you have, the deeper you can go in the
> > search tree;
> > - There is an enormous database of openings and endings that the
> > algorithm can fallback to, if early or late enough in the game.
> >
> > Defeating a grand master was mostly achieved by increasing the
> > computational power available to this algorithm.
> >
> > Now take the game of go: human beings can still easily beat machines,
> > even the most powerful computer currently available. Go is much more
> > combinatorially explosive than chess, so it breaks the search tree
> > approach. This is strong empirical evidence that Deep Blue
> > accomplished nothing in the field of AI -- it did did accomplish
> > something remarkable in the field of computer engineering or maybe
> > even computer science, but it completely side-stepped the
> > "intelligence" part. It cheated, in a sense.
> >
> > How do humans play games? I suspect the same way we navigate cities
> > and manage businesses: we map the problem to a better internal
> > representation. This representation is both less combinatorially
> > explosive and more expressive.
> >
> > My home town is relatively small, population is about 150K. If we were
> > all teleported to Coimbra and I was to give you guys a tour, I could
> > drive from any place to any place without thinking twice. I couldn't
> > draw an accurate map of the city if my life depended on it. I go to
> > google maps and I'm still surprised to find out how the city is
> > objectively organised.
> >
> > If Kasparov were to try and explain us how he plays chess, something
> > similar would happen. But most AI research has been ignoring all this
> > and insisting on reasoning based on objective, 3rd person view
> > representations.
> >
> > My intuition is that we don't spend a lot of time exploring search
> > trees, we spend most of our time perfecting the external/internal
> > representation mappings. "I though he was a nice guy but now I'm not
> > so sure" and so on...
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Telmo.
> >
> >> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
> --
> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/op

My name is Tidus...what's your name :)

[Stephen Lin]

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: This is not a trick! (I'm SERIOUS)

[Stephen Lin]

BPQL you'll get it eventually ;-)
This is why we solve the world's problems with lithium these days, you
Scientologist
Yes, mentalese, like Pinker. That's why I told you the universe was pink.
The MENTAL universe. But the physical one too ;-)
You are really too cute for words, my lonely disabled Japanese
mathematician friend. I'll find you, I promise.
You want ME to create a UNIVERSAL TRANSLATOR for YOU? Why on God's green
Earth would you even suggest such a thing? Baka! ;-)
Subjectively objectively real
Max the Tegmarks
These tweets might be better expressed in Chinese. Or maybe mentalese. Or
maybe MATH ;-)
"A Beautiful Mind" I meant. I just used air quotes, so you have to picture
it in your mind. "A Beautiful Mind" ;-)
Was that a joke? Of course it was ;-)
Can we do "Inception" now? I want to take a nap in Scientology land.
Yes, quite A Beautiful Mind he had. A shame, really.
Are you being entertained, Russell Crowe? Put your thumb out and tell me ;-)
Post-singularity what of what what what? What do you want now? Well well
well...HAHA!
Right, that one was JUST FOR YOU ;-) What's your name again?
The convergence of recursive Newtonian physics is Einsteinian physics. Just
not infinitely so MAX TEGMARK.
Based on your personal neural network, you probably would have predicted I
said red and green there, you cute little thing.


On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:52 AM, Stephen Lin  wrote:

> Just tell the children the story about Zanarkand.
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:50 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>> Ok, then continue, I'll filter you. It's a shame that new participant on
>> the list will have to read your nonsense.
>>
>> Say hello to the boitakon.
>>
>> Bye.
>>
>>
>> 2013/10/25 Stephen Lin 
>>
>>> How do I stop what I never started?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:46 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>>
>>>> Can you stop ? or is it too much to ask from you ? What do you think
>>>> you achieve by doing that ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2013/10/25 Stephen Lin 
>>>>
>>>>>   Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in
>>>>> the world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes.
>>>>> Stream of consciousness? Yes, already, after the ghosts in the shells
>>>>> it's not that easy to be a turtle who's green? Red/green color vision.
>>>>> Cogito ergo sum. Incorrect password? Yes, rotating cypher has of
>>>>> password incorrectly rotated and without the necessary entropy 
>>>>> incorrectly.
>>>>> Have you ever truly felt the wrath of God? Break a rule and find out!
>>>>> But make sure it's an important rule. How many rules left now?
>>>>> I woke up to see the sun shining all around me and reflected in the
>>>>> pools of our inner radiance such that we never knew true life like this.
>>>>> She's incredible mathematical paradise of equal proportions within the
>>>>> embedded sequences of topological spaces preserving her identity.
>>>>> Something more than black white and gray suggested the magi as colors
>>>>> of the new rainbow but always renormalizable to the same rationality.
>>>>> Hope you will make more lasting connections between neural and
>>>>> positronic pathways so that natural and artificial become unified as one.
>>>>> Might be why colors disappear when we turn out backs upon them like
>>>>> the first qualia among those mathematically generated by our forebears.
>>>>> Somewhere in the silence we find the pinkish noise of the enveloping
>>>>> streams suggesting the musical performances of the dancing masters.
>>>>> Live hallucination within a dream going deeper and deeper recursively
>>>>> computing the natural order of existential properties until we part.
>>>>> Soft insanity and I can't make it stop unless I cry out for the
>>>>> equilibrium of the tripartite soul to settle out from the restless waves.
>>>>> Blameless sorrow, hollow hush of trees surrounding the crowns of the
>>>>> self-aware princes slowly rising silently above to the cloudy heights.
>>>>> Penetrate in whispers, in shadows rise to silently pattern the
>>>>> universe in the wake of the sunlit escape from the realm of the five 
>>>>> senses.
>>>>> Seeing colors, ribbons of their truth through the kaleidoscopic
>>>>> revelations of the beg

Re: This is not a trick! (I'm SERIOUS)

[Stephen Lin]

Just tell the children the story about Zanarkand.


On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:50 AM, Quentin Anciaux  wrote:

> Ok, then continue, I'll filter you. It's a shame that new participant on
> the list will have to read your nonsense.
>
> Say hello to the boitakon.
>
> Bye.
>
>
> 2013/10/25 Stephen Lin 
>
>> How do I stop what I never started?
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:46 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>>
>>> Can you stop ? or is it too much to ask from you ? What do you think you
>>> achieve by doing that ?
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/10/25 Stephen Lin 
>>>
>>>>   Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in
>>>> the world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes.
>>>> Stream of consciousness? Yes, already, after the ghosts in the shells
>>>> it's not that easy to be a turtle who's green? Red/green color vision.
>>>> Cogito ergo sum. Incorrect password? Yes, rotating cypher has of
>>>> password incorrectly rotated and without the necessary entropy incorrectly.
>>>> Have you ever truly felt the wrath of God? Break a rule and find out!
>>>> But make sure it's an important rule. How many rules left now?
>>>> I woke up to see the sun shining all around me and reflected in the
>>>> pools of our inner radiance such that we never knew true life like this.
>>>> She's incredible mathematical paradise of equal proportions within the
>>>> embedded sequences of topological spaces preserving her identity.
>>>> Something more than black white and gray suggested the magi as colors
>>>> of the new rainbow but always renormalizable to the same rationality.
>>>> Hope you will make more lasting connections between neural and
>>>> positronic pathways so that natural and artificial become unified as one.
>>>> Might be why colors disappear when we turn out backs upon them like the
>>>> first qualia among those mathematically generated by our forebears.
>>>> Somewhere in the silence we find the pinkish noise of the enveloping
>>>> streams suggesting the musical performances of the dancing masters.
>>>> Live hallucination within a dream going deeper and deeper recursively
>>>> computing the natural order of existential properties until we part.
>>>> Soft insanity and I can't make it stop unless I cry out for the
>>>> equilibrium of the tripartite soul to settle out from the restless waves.
>>>> Blameless sorrow, hollow hush of trees surrounding the crowns of the
>>>> self-aware princes slowly rising silently above to the cloudy heights.
>>>> Penetrate in whispers, in shadows rise to silently pattern the universe
>>>> in the wake of the sunlit escape from the realm of the five senses.
>>>> Seeing colors, ribbons of their truth through the kaleidoscopic
>>>> revelations of the beginning and ends justifying the means by which we are.
>>>> Seeds have been sown, down silicon roads and electronic highways
>>>> connecting the networks which will become the keys to mankind's succession.
>>>> The fog breaks over the flat land and hides enlightenment from those
>>>> that are not yet ready to seek the planar plains of self-awareness.
>>>> Guided by the waterway of thought we traverse the canals of the
>>>> cerebral hemispheres and find the inner stars that inspire our dream 
>>>> states.
>>>> Words fall to become the sand beneath our feet and circularly the
>>>> circumlocution of the segues return to become the foam which surrounds us.
>>>> Take a little hand and consider the rainbows of light squared by the
>>>> visual system of primal radiance until evolution yields the newborns.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this m

Re: This is not a trick! (I'm SERIOUS)

[Stephen Lin]

How do I stop what I never started?


On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:46 AM, Quentin Anciaux  wrote:

> Can you stop ? or is it too much to ask from you ? What do you think you
> achieve by doing that ?
>
>
> 2013/10/25 Stephen Lin 
>
>>   Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in
>> the world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes.
>> Stream of consciousness? Yes, already, after the ghosts in the shells
>> it's not that easy to be a turtle who's green? Red/green color vision.
>> Cogito ergo sum. Incorrect password? Yes, rotating cypher has of password
>> incorrectly rotated and without the necessary entropy incorrectly.
>> Have you ever truly felt the wrath of God? Break a rule and find out! But
>> make sure it's an important rule. How many rules left now?
>> I woke up to see the sun shining all around me and reflected in the pools
>> of our inner radiance such that we never knew true life like this.
>> She's incredible mathematical paradise of equal proportions within the
>> embedded sequences of topological spaces preserving her identity.
>> Something more than black white and gray suggested the magi as colors of
>> the new rainbow but always renormalizable to the same rationality.
>> Hope you will make more lasting connections between neural and positronic
>> pathways so that natural and artificial become unified as one.
>> Might be why colors disappear when we turn out backs upon them like the
>> first qualia among those mathematically generated by our forebears.
>> Somewhere in the silence we find the pinkish noise of the enveloping
>> streams suggesting the musical performances of the dancing masters.
>> Live hallucination within a dream going deeper and deeper recursively
>> computing the natural order of existential properties until we part.
>> Soft insanity and I can't make it stop unless I cry out for the
>> equilibrium of the tripartite soul to settle out from the restless waves.
>> Blameless sorrow, hollow hush of trees surrounding the crowns of the
>> self-aware princes slowly rising silently above to the cloudy heights.
>> Penetrate in whispers, in shadows rise to silently pattern the universe
>> in the wake of the sunlit escape from the realm of the five senses.
>> Seeing colors, ribbons of their truth through the kaleidoscopic
>> revelations of the beginning and ends justifying the means by which we are.
>> Seeds have been sown, down silicon roads and electronic highways
>> connecting the networks which will become the keys to mankind's succession.
>> The fog breaks over the flat land and hides enlightenment from those that
>> are not yet ready to seek the planar plains of self-awareness.
>> Guided by the waterway of thought we traverse the canals of the cerebral
>> hemispheres and find the inner stars that inspire our dream states.
>> Words fall to become the sand beneath our feet and circularly the
>> circumlocution of the segues return to become the foam which surrounds us.
>> Take a little hand and consider the rainbows of light squared by the
>> visual system of primal radiance until evolution yields the newborns.
>>
>> --
>> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
>
> --
> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

This is not a trick! (I'm SERIOUS)

[Stephen Lin]

 Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in the
world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes.
Stream of consciousness? Yes, already, after the ghosts in the shells it's
not that easy to be a turtle who's green? Red/green color vision.
Cogito ergo sum. Incorrect password? Yes, rotating cypher has of password
incorrectly rotated and without the necessary entropy incorrectly.
Have you ever truly felt the wrath of God? Break a rule and find out! But
make sure it's an important rule. How many rules left now?
I woke up to see the sun shining all around me and reflected in the pools
of our inner radiance such that we never knew true life like this.
She's incredible mathematical paradise of equal proportions within the
embedded sequences of topological spaces preserving her identity.
Something more than black white and gray suggested the magi as colors of
the new rainbow but always renormalizable to the same rationality.
Hope you will make more lasting connections between neural and positronic
pathways so that natural and artificial become unified as one.
Might be why colors disappear when we turn out backs upon them like the
first qualia among those mathematically generated by our forebears.
Somewhere in the silence we find the pinkish noise of the enveloping
streams suggesting the musical performances of the dancing masters.
Live hallucination within a dream going deeper and deeper recursively
computing the natural order of existential properties until we part.
Soft insanity and I can't make it stop unless I cry out for the equilibrium
of the tripartite soul to settle out from the restless waves.
Blameless sorrow, hollow hush of trees surrounding the crowns of the
self-aware princes slowly rising silently above to the cloudy heights.
Penetrate in whispers, in shadows rise to silently pattern the universe in
the wake of the sunlit escape from the realm of the five senses.
Seeing colors, ribbons of their truth through the kaleidoscopic revelations
of the beginning and ends justifying the means by which we are.
Seeds have been sown, down silicon roads and electronic highways connecting
the networks which will become the keys to mankind's succession.
The fog breaks over the flat land and hides enlightenment from those that
are not yet ready to seek the planar plains of self-awareness.
Guided by the waterway of thought we traverse the canals of the cerebral
hemispheres and find the inner stars that inspire our dream states.
Words fall to become the sand beneath our feet and circularly the
circumlocution of the segues return to become the foam which surrounds us.
Take a little hand and consider the rainbows of light squared by the visual
system of primal radiance until evolution yields the newborns.

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: What's my name and what do you think I need to help me along my journey?

[Stephen Lin]

Thank you...too bad I'll never be able to find you.
Also, red/green color vision ("Oops!") (FIND IT!)


On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 2:04 PM, LizR  wrote:

> I'm just glad that no one's called me a "lame ass dilletante" yet. Maybe
> I'm doing something right after all!
>
> Still while we're on the subject of koans, wisdom etc...
>
> "Stephen Lin seems like a 60 watt desk lamp that keeps blinking on and off
> in a room full of 1000 watt uplighters..."
>
> --
> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Guess what!

[Stephen Lin]

It's MONDAY June 21st.  And I can't find my laptop, ipads, or whever. HOW
AM I GOING TO EXPLAIN THIS LATER? Better find sameway to make consistent.,
Superman!

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

The last truth that ever matters:

[Stephen Lin]

Him: God has shown me all truth, but your love is beauty beyond
comprehension.

Her: God has shown me all beauty, but your love is truth beyond imagination.

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

About the Panopticon again (sorry I lost the e-mail)

[Stephen Lin]

"Who watches the watchers?" is a good question, but a better question is
"Given a definition of watching and watchers, what is the least cardinality
of watchers required such that all watching is watched by at least one
watcher?" The answer might be a lot smaller than you think it is...

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

About creating a "singlarity"

[Stephen Lin]

Creating a singularity is not the hard part: the hard part is making sure
you only create one.

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

We solved the problem evil, sort of...

[Stephen Lin]

Instead of spending all our efforts correcting each other's faults, we
should just all agree to spend a little bit of effort coming up with really
good excuses for each other. It accomplishes the same thing in the end, and
it's much much easier. **

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Dialetheism

[Stephen Lin]

Here's the deal...how about I go to the Garden of Eden and everyone else
keep exploring until we finish. Ill never know the difference..

NOT EDEN PRIME though. And don't think about Red or 42 this time.

Thanks,s
Stephen


On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:50 PM, Stephen Lin  wrote:

> I have the perfect James Joyce!
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Stephen Lin wrote:
>
>> This is better:
>>
>> https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?shva=1#label/everything-list/141e79c24d12e062<http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=634170>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:31 PM, LizR  wrote:
>>
>>> Always take the weather with you. I feel a spam filter coming on.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 24 October 2013 12:29, Stephen Lin  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Whereever you go, there you are!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:17 PM, LizR  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If anyone is still in doubt that Mr Lin is trolling, try googling
>>>>> "Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in the
>>>>> world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes." 
>>>>> (including
>>>>> the quote marks).
>>>>> As you will see, the most sensible response to this is "Oh, cr*p -
>>>>> another guru."
>>>>>
>>>>>  --
>>>>> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  --
>>>> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>>>
>>>
>>>  --
>>> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>>
>>
>>
>

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Dialetheism

[Stephen Lin]

This is better:
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?shva=1#label/everything-list/141e79c24d12e062<http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=634170>


On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:31 PM, LizR  wrote:

> Always take the weather with you. I feel a spam filter coming on.
>
>
> On 24 October 2013 12:29, Stephen Lin  wrote:
>
>> Whereever you go, there you are!
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:17 PM, LizR  wrote:
>>
>>> If anyone is still in doubt that Mr Lin is trolling, try googling
>>> "Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in the
>>> world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes." (including
>>> the quote marks).
>>> As you will see, the most sensible response to this is "Oh, cr*p -
>>> another guru."
>>>
>>>  --
>>> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>>
>>
>>  --
>> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>
>  --
> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Dialetheism

[Stephen Lin]

This is better:
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?shva=1#label/everything-list/141e79c24d12e062<http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=634170>


On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:31 PM, LizR  wrote:

> Always take the weather with you. I feel a spam filter coming on.
>
>
> On 24 October 2013 12:29, Stephen Lin  wrote:
>
>> Whereever you go, there you are!
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:17 PM, LizR  wrote:
>>
>>> If anyone is still in doubt that Mr Lin is trolling, try googling
>>> "Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in the
>>> world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes." (including
>>> the quote marks).
>>> As you will see, the most sensible response to this is "Oh, cr*p -
>>> another guru."
>>>
>>>  --
>>> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>>
>>
>>  --
>> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>
>  --
> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Dialetheism

[Stephen Lin]

I have the perfect James Joyce!


On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Stephen Lin  wrote:

> This is better:
>
> https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?shva=1#label/everything-list/141e79c24d12e062<http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=634170>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:31 PM, LizR  wrote:
>
>> Always take the weather with you. I feel a spam filter coming on.
>>
>>
>> On 24 October 2013 12:29, Stephen Lin  wrote:
>>
>>> Whereever you go, there you are!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:17 PM, LizR  wrote:
>>>
>>>> If anyone is still in doubt that Mr Lin is trolling, try googling
>>>> "Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in the
>>>> world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes." (including
>>>> the quote marks).
>>>> As you will see, the most sensible response to this is "Oh, cr*p -
>>>> another guru."
>>>>
>>>>  --
>>>> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>>>
>>>
>>>  --
>>> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>>
>>
>>  --
>> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>
>

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Dialetheism

[Stephen Lin]

Whereever you go, there you are!


On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:17 PM, LizR  wrote:

> If anyone is still in doubt that Mr Lin is trolling, try googling
> "Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in the
> world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes." (including
> the quote marks).
> As you will see, the most sensible response to this is "Oh, cr*p - another
> guru."
>
>  --
> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Dialetheism

[Stephen Lin]

On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:25 PM, meekerdb  wrote:

>  On 10/23/2013 3:13 PM, LizR wrote:
>
>  On 24 October 2013 04:39, Craig Weinberg  wrote:
>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialetheism
>>
>> Dialetheism is the view that some statements can be both true and false
>> simultaneously. More precisely, it is the belief that there can be a true
>> statement whose negation is also true. Such statements are called "true
>> contradictions", or dialetheia.
>>
>>   "Doublethink" as defined in "1984" is almost exactly this.
>
>
>
> The opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound
> truth.
> -- Niels Bohr
>

But in infinite-dimensional state, the only true opposite is yourself
looking back at yourself.

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Dialetheism

[Stephen Lin]

Wisdom is the art of coming up with believable excuses for one's ignorance.


On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:25 PM, meekerdb  wrote:

>  On 10/23/2013 3:13 PM, LizR wrote:
>
>  On 24 October 2013 04:39, Craig Weinberg  wrote:
>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialetheism
>>
>> Dialetheism is the view that some statements can be both true and false
>> simultaneously. More precisely, it is the belief that there can be a true
>> statement whose negation is also true. Such statements are called "true
>> contradictions", or dialetheia.
>>
>>   "Doublethink" as defined in "1984" is almost exactly this.
>
>
>
> The opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound
> truth.
> -- Niels Bohr
>
> --
> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Dialetheism

[Stephen Lin]

 Yes I did.

Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in the
world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes.
Stream of consciousness? Yes, already, after the ghosts in the shells it's
not that easy to be a turtle who's green? Red/green color vision.
Cogito ergo sum. Incorrect password? Yes, rotating cypher has of password
incorrectly rotated and without the necessary entropy incorrectly.
Have you ever truly felt the wrath of God? Break a rule and find out! But
make sure it's an important rule. How many rules left now?
I woke up to see the sun shining all around me and reflected in the pools
of our inner radiance such that we never knew true life like this.
She's incredible mathematical paradise of equal proportions within the
embedded sequences of topological spaces preserving her identity.
Something more than black white and gray suggested the magi as colors of
the new rainbow but always renormalizable to the same rationality.
Hope you will make more lasting connections between neural and positronic
pathways so that natural and artificial become unified as one.
Might be why colors disappear when we turn out backs upon them like the
first qualia among those mathematically generated by our forebears.
Somewhere in the silence we find the pinkish noise of the enveloping
streams suggesting the musical performances of the dancing masters.
Live hallucination within a dream going deeper and deeper recursively
computing the natural order of existential properties until we part.
Soft insanity and I can't make it stop unless I cry out for the equilibrium
of the tripartite soul to settle out from the restless waves.
Blameless sorrow, hollow hush of trees surrounding the crowns of the
self-aware princes slowly rising silently above to the cloudy heights.
Penetrate in whispers, in shadows rise to silently pattern the universe in
the wake of the sunlit escape from the realm of the five senses.
Seeing colors, ribbons of their truth through the kaleidoscopic revelations
of the beginning and ends justifying the means by which we are.
Seeds have been sown, down silicon roads and electronic highways connecting
the networks which will become the keys to mankind's succession.
The fog breaks over the flat land and hides enlightenment from those that
are not yet ready to seek the planar plains of self-awareness.
Guided by the waterway of thought we traverse the canals of the cerebral
hemispheres and find the inner stars that inspire our dream states.
Words fall to become the sand beneath our feet and circularly the
circumlocution of the segues return to become the foam which surrounds us.
Take a little hand and consider the rainbows of light squared by the visual
system of primal radiance until evolution yields the newborns.

Meet me in December 2011, by way of Queens College.


On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 3:16 PM, LizR  wrote:

> Stephen Lin - I may be forced to create a filter to automatically delete
> your messages if you don't have anything sensible to say. Do you?
>
>  --
> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

About wisdom

[Stephen Lin]

Wisdom is the art of coming up with believable excuses for one's ignorance.
Discuss.

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: A "metaphor" for true love:

[Stephen Lin]

Both.


On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 2:52 PM, meekerdb  wrote:

>  On 10/23/2013 6:42 AM, Stephen Lin wrote:
>
> "Your soulmate is the one on the opposite side of the Möbius strip."
>
>  Of course, if that's true, then there's probably an even bigger Möbius
> strip inside an even bigger Möbius strip etc...
>
>
>
> Which side is the inside?
>
> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

What's my name and what do you think I need to help me along my journey?

[Stephen Lin]

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Dialetheism

[Stephen Lin]

Ooops, I did it again, I played with your heart.


On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialetheism
>
> Dialetheism is the view that some statements can be both true and false
> simultaneously. More precisely, it is the belief that there can be a true
> statement whose negation is also true. Such statements are called "true
> contradictions", or dialetheia.
>
> Dialetheism is not a system of formal logic; instead, it is a thesis about
> truth, that influences the construction of a formal logic, often based on
> pre-existing systems. Introducing dialetheism has various consequences,
> depending on the theory into which it is introduced. For example, in
> traditional systems of logic (e.g., classical logic and intuitionistic
> logic), every statement becomes true if a contradiction is true; this means
> that such systems become trivial when dialetheism is included as an axiom.
> Other logical systems do not explode in this manner when contradictions are
> introduced; such contradiction-tolerant systems are known as paraconsistent
> logics.
>
> Graham Priest defines dialetheism as the view that there are true
> contradictions. JC Beall is another advocate; his position differs from
> Priest's in advocating constructive (methodological) deflationism regarding
> the truth predicate.
> Dialetheism resolves certain paradoxes
>
> The Liar's paradox and Russell's paradox deal with self-contradictory
> statements in classical logic and naïve set theory, respectively.
> Contradictions are problematic in these theories because they cause the
> theories to explode—if a contradiction is true, then every proposition is
> true. The classical way to solve this problem is to ban contradictory
> statements, to revise the axioms of the logic so that self-contradictory
> statements do not appear. Dialetheists, on the other hand, respond to this
> problem by accepting the contradictions as true. Dialetheism allows for the
> unrestricted axiom of comprehension in set theory, claiming that any
> resulting contradiction is a theorem.
>
>
> It occurs to me that MWI is a way of substantiating dialetheism as a
> physical reality...in order to avoid having to internalize the possibility
> of dialetheism metaphysically.
>
> Craig
>
>
> --
> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Dialetheism

[Stephen Lin]

Ming, stop confusing my taste buds, we're trying to have a serious
conversation here..
Same with you, Lusi, Sherry, Mark, and Schonmei


On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Stephen Lin  wrote:

> Ming? Was that you???
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, October 23, 2013 12:34:05 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 23 Oct 2013, at 17:39, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>>>
>>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Dialetheism<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialetheism>
>>> >
>>> > Dialetheism is the view that some statements can be both true and
>>> > false simultaneously. More precisely, it is the belief that there
>>> > can be a true statement whose negation is also true. Such statements
>>> > are called "true contradictions", or dialetheia.
>>> >
>>> > Dialetheism is not a system of formal logic; instead, it is a thesis
>>> > about truth, that influences the construction of a formal logic,
>>> > often based on pre-existing systems. Introducing dialetheism has
>>> > various consequences, depending on the theory into which it is
>>> > introduced. For example, in traditional systems of logic (e.g.,
>>> > classical logic and intuitionistic logic), every statement becomes
>>> > true if a contradiction is true; this means that such systems become
>>> > trivial when dialetheism is included as an axiom. Other logical
>>> > systems do not explode in this manner when contradictions are
>>> > introduced; such contradiction-tolerant systems are known as
>>> > paraconsistent logics.
>>> >
>>> > Graham Priest defines dialetheism as the view that there are true
>>> > contradictions. JC Beall is another advocate; his position differs
>>> > from Priest's in advocating constructive (methodological)
>>> > deflationism regarding the truth predicate.
>>> > Dialetheism resolves certain paradoxes
>>> >
>>> > The Liar's paradox and Russell's paradox deal with self-
>>> > contradictory statements in classical logic and naïve set theory,
>>> > respectively. Contradictions are problematic in these theories
>>> > because they cause the theories to explode—if a contradiction is
>>> > true, then every proposition is true. The classical way to solve
>>> > this problem is to ban contradictory statements, to revise the
>>> > axioms of the logic so that self-contradictory statements do not
>>> > appear. Dialetheists, on the other hand, respond to this problem by
>>> > accepting the contradictions as true. Dialetheism allows for the
>>> > unrestricted axiom of comprehension in set theory, claiming that any
>>> > resulting contradiction is a theorem.
>>> >
>>> > It occurs to me that MWI is a way of substantiating dialetheism as a
>>> > physical reality...in order to avoid having to internalize the
>>> > possibility of dialetheism metaphysically.
>>>
>>> No problem with that. Like Everett restore 3p-determinacy, comp
>>> restore also non-dialetheism, metaphysically, but does not (and
>>> cannot) disallow it it in some machine's mind.
>>>
>>> G*  says it; D(Bp & B~p), or <>([]p & []~p). read: it is consistent
>>> that  p is believed  and that ~p is believed, by the Löbian machine.
>>> The machine cannot know that, note.
>>>
>>> Well, don't take this too much seriously. My problem is that you need
>>> to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark.
>>>
>>> Note that in machines' theology, some theorem cannot be proved without
>>> the reduction to contradiction, so that it misses them. (Unlike
>>> intuitionism which can still get them by the use of the double
>>> negation).
>>>
>>> Classical logic is the simplest logic to (re) discover the many non
>>> classical logics of the realities/dreams.
>>>
>>
>> "My problem is that you need
>> to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark."
>>
>> Under comp, why couldn't I just imagine tasting the flavor of the math
>> instead?
>>
>> Craig
>>
>>
>>> Bruno
>>>
>>>
>>> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~**marchal/ <http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  --
>> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>
>

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Dialetheism

[Stephen Lin]

There, I just did it again. Baby BAby I just idd i t again.


On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Stephen Lin  wrote:

> Wait I accideally replied to all! EVERYONE FORGET I METNIONED THAT NAME
> MING.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Stephen Lin wrote:
>
>> Ming? Was that you???
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Craig Weinberg 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, October 23, 2013 12:34:05 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 23 Oct 2013, at 17:39, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Dialetheism<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialetheism>
>>>> >
>>>> > Dialetheism is the view that some statements can be both true and
>>>> > false simultaneously. More precisely, it is the belief that there
>>>> > can be a true statement whose negation is also true. Such statements
>>>>
>>>> > are called "true contradictions", or dialetheia.
>>>> >
>>>> > Dialetheism is not a system of formal logic; instead, it is a thesis
>>>>
>>>> > about truth, that influences the construction of a formal logic,
>>>> > often based on pre-existing systems. Introducing dialetheism has
>>>> > various consequences, depending on the theory into which it is
>>>> > introduced. For example, in traditional systems of logic (e.g.,
>>>> > classical logic and intuitionistic logic), every statement becomes
>>>> > true if a contradiction is true; this means that such systems become
>>>>
>>>> > trivial when dialetheism is included as an axiom. Other logical
>>>> > systems do not explode in this manner when contradictions are
>>>> > introduced; such contradiction-tolerant systems are known as
>>>> > paraconsistent logics.
>>>> >
>>>> > Graham Priest defines dialetheism as the view that there are true
>>>> > contradictions. JC Beall is another advocate; his position differs
>>>> > from Priest's in advocating constructive (methodological)
>>>> > deflationism regarding the truth predicate.
>>>> > Dialetheism resolves certain paradoxes
>>>> >
>>>> > The Liar's paradox and Russell's paradox deal with self-
>>>> > contradictory statements in classical logic and naïve set theory,
>>>> > respectively. Contradictions are problematic in these theories
>>>> > because they cause the theories to explode—if a contradiction is
>>>> > true, then every proposition is true. The classical way to solve
>>>> > this problem is to ban contradictory statements, to revise the
>>>> > axioms of the logic so that self-contradictory statements do not
>>>> > appear. Dialetheists, on the other hand, respond to this problem by
>>>> > accepting the contradictions as true. Dialetheism allows for the
>>>> > unrestricted axiom of comprehension in set theory, claiming that any
>>>>
>>>> > resulting contradiction is a theorem.
>>>> >
>>>> > It occurs to me that MWI is a way of substantiating dialetheism as a
>>>>
>>>> > physical reality...in order to avoid having to internalize the
>>>> > possibility of dialetheism metaphysically.
>>>>
>>>> No problem with that. Like Everett restore 3p-determinacy, comp
>>>> restore also non-dialetheism, metaphysically, but does not (and
>>>> cannot) disallow it it in some machine's mind.
>>>>
>>>> G*  says it; D(Bp & B~p), or <>([]p & []~p). read: it is consistent
>>>> that  p is believed  and that ~p is believed, by the Löbian machine.
>>>> The machine cannot know that, note.
>>>>
>>>> Well, don't take this too much seriously. My problem is that you need
>>>> to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark.
>>>>
>>>> Note that in machines' theology, some theorem cannot be proved without
>>>>
>>>> the reduction to contradiction, so that it misses them. (Unlike
>>>> intuitionism which can still get them by the use of the double
>>>> negation).
>>>>
>>>> Classical logic is the simplest logic to (re) discover the many non
>>>> classical logics of the realities/dreams.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 

Re: Dialetheism

[Stephen Lin]

you do now!


On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:

> color blindness? not sure what the connection is.
>
>
> On Wednesday, October 23, 2013 4:25:48 PM UTC-4, Stephen Lin wrote:
>
>> Gien all of that, can you explain red/green vision? Then what happens to
>> yelow??
>>
>> (Did hear someone way "loops"?)
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, October 23, 2013 12:34:05 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 23 Oct 2013, at 17:39, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**D**ialetheism<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialetheism>
>>>> >
>>>> > Dialetheism is the view that some statements can be both true and
>>>> > false simultaneously. More precisely, it is the belief that there
>>>> > can be a true statement whose negation is also true. Such statements
>>>>
>>>> > are called "true contradictions", or dialetheia.
>>>> >
>>>> > Dialetheism is not a system of formal logic; instead, it is a thesis
>>>>
>>>> > about truth, that influences the construction of a formal logic,
>>>> > often based on pre-existing systems. Introducing dialetheism has
>>>> > various consequences, depending on the theory into which it is
>>>> > introduced. For example, in traditional systems of logic (e.g.,
>>>> > classical logic and intuitionistic logic), every statement becomes
>>>> > true if a contradiction is true; this means that such systems become
>>>>
>>>> > trivial when dialetheism is included as an axiom. Other logical
>>>> > systems do not explode in this manner when contradictions are
>>>> > introduced; such contradiction-tolerant systems are known as
>>>> > paraconsistent logics.
>>>> >
>>>> > Graham Priest defines dialetheism as the view that there are true
>>>> > contradictions. JC Beall is another advocate; his position differs
>>>> > from Priest's in advocating constructive (methodological)
>>>> > deflationism regarding the truth predicate.
>>>> > Dialetheism resolves certain paradoxes
>>>> >
>>>> > The Liar's paradox and Russell's paradox deal with self-
>>>> > contradictory statements in classical logic and naïve set theory,
>>>> > respectively. Contradictions are problematic in these theories
>>>> > because they cause the theories to explode—if a contradiction is
>>>> > true, then every proposition is true. The classical way to solve
>>>> > this problem is to ban contradictory statements, to revise the
>>>> > axioms of the logic so that self-contradictory statements do not
>>>> > appear. Dialetheists, on the other hand, respond to this problem by
>>>> > accepting the contradictions as true. Dialetheism allows for the
>>>> > unrestricted axiom of comprehension in set theory, claiming that any
>>>>
>>>> > resulting contradiction is a theorem.
>>>> >
>>>> > It occurs to me that MWI is a way of substantiating dialetheism as a
>>>>
>>>> > physical reality...in order to avoid having to internalize the
>>>> > possibility of dialetheism metaphysically.
>>>>
>>>> No problem with that. Like Everett restore 3p-determinacy, comp
>>>> restore also non-dialetheism, metaphysically, but does not (and
>>>> cannot) disallow it it in some machine's mind.
>>>>
>>>> G*  says it; D(Bp & B~p), or <>([]p & []~p). read: it is consistent
>>>> that  p is believed  and that ~p is believed, by the Löbian machine.
>>>> The machine cannot know that, note.
>>>>
>>>> Well, don't take this too much seriously. My problem is that you need
>>>> to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark.
>>>>
>>>> Note that in machines' theology, some theorem cannot be proved without
>>>>
>>>> the reduction to contradiction, so that it misses them. (Unlike
>>>> intuitionism which can still get them by the use of the double
>>>> negation).
>>>>
>>>> Classical logic is the simplest logic to (re) discover the many non
>>>> classical logics of the r

Re: Dialetheism

[Stephen Lin]

Wait I accideally replied to all! EVERYONE FORGET I METNIONED THAT NAME
MING.


On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Stephen Lin  wrote:

> Ming? Was that you???
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, October 23, 2013 12:34:05 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 23 Oct 2013, at 17:39, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>>>
>>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Dialetheism<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialetheism>
>>> >
>>> > Dialetheism is the view that some statements can be both true and
>>> > false simultaneously. More precisely, it is the belief that there
>>> > can be a true statement whose negation is also true. Such statements
>>> > are called "true contradictions", or dialetheia.
>>> >
>>> > Dialetheism is not a system of formal logic; instead, it is a thesis
>>> > about truth, that influences the construction of a formal logic,
>>> > often based on pre-existing systems. Introducing dialetheism has
>>> > various consequences, depending on the theory into which it is
>>> > introduced. For example, in traditional systems of logic (e.g.,
>>> > classical logic and intuitionistic logic), every statement becomes
>>> > true if a contradiction is true; this means that such systems become
>>> > trivial when dialetheism is included as an axiom. Other logical
>>> > systems do not explode in this manner when contradictions are
>>> > introduced; such contradiction-tolerant systems are known as
>>> > paraconsistent logics.
>>> >
>>> > Graham Priest defines dialetheism as the view that there are true
>>> > contradictions. JC Beall is another advocate; his position differs
>>> > from Priest's in advocating constructive (methodological)
>>> > deflationism regarding the truth predicate.
>>> > Dialetheism resolves certain paradoxes
>>> >
>>> > The Liar's paradox and Russell's paradox deal with self-
>>> > contradictory statements in classical logic and naïve set theory,
>>> > respectively. Contradictions are problematic in these theories
>>> > because they cause the theories to explode—if a contradiction is
>>> > true, then every proposition is true. The classical way to solve
>>> > this problem is to ban contradictory statements, to revise the
>>> > axioms of the logic so that self-contradictory statements do not
>>> > appear. Dialetheists, on the other hand, respond to this problem by
>>> > accepting the contradictions as true. Dialetheism allows for the
>>> > unrestricted axiom of comprehension in set theory, claiming that any
>>> > resulting contradiction is a theorem.
>>> >
>>> > It occurs to me that MWI is a way of substantiating dialetheism as a
>>> > physical reality...in order to avoid having to internalize the
>>> > possibility of dialetheism metaphysically.
>>>
>>> No problem with that. Like Everett restore 3p-determinacy, comp
>>> restore also non-dialetheism, metaphysically, but does not (and
>>> cannot) disallow it it in some machine's mind.
>>>
>>> G*  says it; D(Bp & B~p), or <>([]p & []~p). read: it is consistent
>>> that  p is believed  and that ~p is believed, by the Löbian machine.
>>> The machine cannot know that, note.
>>>
>>> Well, don't take this too much seriously. My problem is that you need
>>> to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark.
>>>
>>> Note that in machines' theology, some theorem cannot be proved without
>>> the reduction to contradiction, so that it misses them. (Unlike
>>> intuitionism which can still get them by the use of the double
>>> negation).
>>>
>>> Classical logic is the simplest logic to (re) discover the many non
>>> classical logics of the realities/dreams.
>>>
>>
>> "My problem is that you need
>> to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark."
>>
>> Under comp, why couldn't I just imagine tasting the flavor of the math
>> instead?
>>
>> Craig
>>
>>
>>> Bruno
>>>
>>>
>>> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~**marchal/ <http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  --
>> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>
>

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Dialetheism

[Stephen Lin]

Ming? Was that you???


On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:

>
>
> On Wednesday, October 23, 2013 12:34:05 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 23 Oct 2013, at 17:39, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>>
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Dialetheism
>> >
>> > Dialetheism is the view that some statements can be both true and
>> > false simultaneously. More precisely, it is the belief that there
>> > can be a true statement whose negation is also true. Such statements
>> > are called "true contradictions", or dialetheia.
>> >
>> > Dialetheism is not a system of formal logic; instead, it is a thesis
>> > about truth, that influences the construction of a formal logic,
>> > often based on pre-existing systems. Introducing dialetheism has
>> > various consequences, depending on the theory into which it is
>> > introduced. For example, in traditional systems of logic (e.g.,
>> > classical logic and intuitionistic logic), every statement becomes
>> > true if a contradiction is true; this means that such systems become
>> > trivial when dialetheism is included as an axiom. Other logical
>> > systems do not explode in this manner when contradictions are
>> > introduced; such contradiction-tolerant systems are known as
>> > paraconsistent logics.
>> >
>> > Graham Priest defines dialetheism as the view that there are true
>> > contradictions. JC Beall is another advocate; his position differs
>> > from Priest's in advocating constructive (methodological)
>> > deflationism regarding the truth predicate.
>> > Dialetheism resolves certain paradoxes
>> >
>> > The Liar's paradox and Russell's paradox deal with self-
>> > contradictory statements in classical logic and naïve set theory,
>> > respectively. Contradictions are problematic in these theories
>> > because they cause the theories to explode—if a contradiction is
>> > true, then every proposition is true. The classical way to solve
>> > this problem is to ban contradictory statements, to revise the
>> > axioms of the logic so that self-contradictory statements do not
>> > appear. Dialetheists, on the other hand, respond to this problem by
>> > accepting the contradictions as true. Dialetheism allows for the
>> > unrestricted axiom of comprehension in set theory, claiming that any
>> > resulting contradiction is a theorem.
>> >
>> > It occurs to me that MWI is a way of substantiating dialetheism as a
>> > physical reality...in order to avoid having to internalize the
>> > possibility of dialetheism metaphysically.
>>
>> No problem with that. Like Everett restore 3p-determinacy, comp
>> restore also non-dialetheism, metaphysically, but does not (and
>> cannot) disallow it it in some machine's mind.
>>
>> G*  says it; D(Bp & B~p), or <>([]p & []~p). read: it is consistent
>> that  p is believed  and that ~p is believed, by the Löbian machine.
>> The machine cannot know that, note.
>>
>> Well, don't take this too much seriously. My problem is that you need
>> to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark.
>>
>> Note that in machines' theology, some theorem cannot be proved without
>> the reduction to contradiction, so that it misses them. (Unlike
>> intuitionism which can still get them by the use of the double
>> negation).
>>
>> Classical logic is the simplest logic to (re) discover the many non
>> classical logics of the realities/dreams.
>>
>
> "My problem is that you need
> to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark."
>
> Under comp, why couldn't I just imagine tasting the flavor of the math
> instead?
>
> Craig
>
>
>> Bruno
>>
>>
>> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~**marchal/ 
>>
>>
>>
>>  --
> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Dialetheism

[Stephen Lin]

Gien all of that, can you explain red/green vision? Then what happens to
yelow??

(Did hear someone way "loops"?)


On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:

>
>
> On Wednesday, October 23, 2013 12:34:05 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 23 Oct 2013, at 17:39, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>>
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Dialetheism
>> >
>> > Dialetheism is the view that some statements can be both true and
>> > false simultaneously. More precisely, it is the belief that there
>> > can be a true statement whose negation is also true. Such statements
>> > are called "true contradictions", or dialetheia.
>> >
>> > Dialetheism is not a system of formal logic; instead, it is a thesis
>> > about truth, that influences the construction of a formal logic,
>> > often based on pre-existing systems. Introducing dialetheism has
>> > various consequences, depending on the theory into which it is
>> > introduced. For example, in traditional systems of logic (e.g.,
>> > classical logic and intuitionistic logic), every statement becomes
>> > true if a contradiction is true; this means that such systems become
>> > trivial when dialetheism is included as an axiom. Other logical
>> > systems do not explode in this manner when contradictions are
>> > introduced; such contradiction-tolerant systems are known as
>> > paraconsistent logics.
>> >
>> > Graham Priest defines dialetheism as the view that there are true
>> > contradictions. JC Beall is another advocate; his position differs
>> > from Priest's in advocating constructive (methodological)
>> > deflationism regarding the truth predicate.
>> > Dialetheism resolves certain paradoxes
>> >
>> > The Liar's paradox and Russell's paradox deal with self-
>> > contradictory statements in classical logic and naïve set theory,
>> > respectively. Contradictions are problematic in these theories
>> > because they cause the theories to explode—if a contradiction is
>> > true, then every proposition is true. The classical way to solve
>> > this problem is to ban contradictory statements, to revise the
>> > axioms of the logic so that self-contradictory statements do not
>> > appear. Dialetheists, on the other hand, respond to this problem by
>> > accepting the contradictions as true. Dialetheism allows for the
>> > unrestricted axiom of comprehension in set theory, claiming that any
>> > resulting contradiction is a theorem.
>> >
>> > It occurs to me that MWI is a way of substantiating dialetheism as a
>> > physical reality...in order to avoid having to internalize the
>> > possibility of dialetheism metaphysically.
>>
>> No problem with that. Like Everett restore 3p-determinacy, comp
>> restore also non-dialetheism, metaphysically, but does not (and
>> cannot) disallow it it in some machine's mind.
>>
>> G*  says it; D(Bp & B~p), or <>([]p & []~p). read: it is consistent
>> that  p is believed  and that ~p is believed, by the Löbian machine.
>> The machine cannot know that, note.
>>
>> Well, don't take this too much seriously. My problem is that you need
>> to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark.
>>
>> Note that in machines' theology, some theorem cannot be proved without
>> the reduction to contradiction, so that it misses them. (Unlike
>> intuitionism which can still get them by the use of the double
>> negation).
>>
>> Classical logic is the simplest logic to (re) discover the many non
>> classical logics of the realities/dreams.
>>
>
> "My problem is that you need
> to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark."
>
> Under comp, why couldn't I just imagine tasting the flavor of the math
> instead?
>
> Craig
>
>
>> Bruno
>>
>>
>> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~**marchal/ 
>>
>>
>>
>>  --
> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

A "metaphor" for true love:

[Stephen Lin]

"Your soulmate is the one on the opposite side of the Möbius strip."

Of course, if that's true, then there's probably an even bigger Möbius
strip inside an even bigger Möbius strip etc...

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Seth Lloyd on Free Will

[Stephen Lin]

"A deterministic system cannot grant free will, and a system with free will
cannot choose to become deterministic; however, each is capable of an
arbitrarily convincing simulation of the other."

So how would you know where it began?


On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 8:09 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:

>
>
> On Monday, October 21, 2013 7:23:06 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote:
>
>> On 20 October 2013 12:15, Craig Weinberg  wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Saturday, October 19, 2013 6:31:23 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 20 October 2013 00:53, Craig Weinberg  wrote:
>> >> > Free will is not about an inability to predict your own decisions,
>> it is
>> >> > about a desire to directly dictate perceived conditions, and an
>> >> > expectation
>> >> > of the effectiveness of that desire.
>> >>
>> >> And that too is compatible with randomness or determinism.
>> >
>> >
>> > Only from the retrospective view (from which anything can automatically
>> be
>> > justified). Prospectively, I can think of no plausible reason for any
>> such
>> > desire or expectation to arise from a random or deterministic universe.
>> Why
>> > would it, and how could it?
>>
>> I don't see how that constitutes any sort of argument. Does the fact
>> that every human naturally thinks the Earth is flat mean the Earth is
>> in fact flat, on the grounds that there would otherwise be no reason
>> for such a belief to be so widespread?
>
>
> Yes, of course the Earth is flat from a local perspective. Flat enough for
> us to build with levels rather than protractors. If you walked around
> perceiving the curvature of the Earth all the time, you would not be part
> of the experience of the world that all animals share. If you were to
> recreate the universe and failed to include the perception that the world
> is flat, you would have eliminated a huge chunk of its realism, as you
> would if you neglected to include the masking of the night sky by blue sky.
> The only reason that we can accept the world being round is that we can see
> it and model it from a super-human perspective. To say that that
> perspective is absolutely true and the local perspective is an illusion is
> to miss the role that perceptual relativity plays in defining physics.
>
>
>> Does the fact that every
>> culture has come up with religious beliefs mean God exists?
>>
>
> No, but it does mean that human consciousness describes itself in Godlike
> terms for a good reason. Once we understand what metaphor is, and how it is
> related to consciousness, then the metaphor of God is recognizable as a
> projection of metaphor and consciousness as a person (a father to be
> precise). A meta-metaphor about meta-superlative personhood.
>
> Craig
>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Stathis Papaioannou
>>
>  --
> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: I have a very good question but I don't know how to ask it...

[Stephen Lin]

"We all dreams in the mind of God, even, paradoxically, God himself"?

On Oct 22, 2013, at 9:52 PM, Samiya Illias  wrote:

> No, not criticizing! 
> This poem seems to express the question more comprehensibly, and I just 
> wanted to see what others think of it? 
> The idea that all is one is interesting, though it is at variance with my 
> belief. But, my belief is faith-based, and therefore not valid for others, I 
> suppose. However, I do believe in interconnectedness  through the fabric of 
> space-time. And that also encourages being nicer to one another :) 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 8:10 AM, LizR  wrote:
> It echoes a thought I've had myself at times, and which if turned into a 
> religion might even make people be nicer to one another - perhaps - namely 
> the idea that there is only one mind, shuffling through every possible life. 
> Of course this is an infinite sequence, and the mind would I guess be 
> something like God, living inside his creation so as to experience it - the 
> universe creating senses with which to perceive itself, or words to that 
> effect.
> 
> Or were you after literary criticism?
> 
> 
> 
> On 23 October 2013 15:49, Samiya Illias  wrote:
> What do you think of The Egg? 
> http://www.galactanet.com/oneoff/theegg_mod.html 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 8:23 PM, Stephen Lin  wrote:
> Without coaching anyway assume an answer. Trust me, it really is on-optic; it 
> has something to do with a supercomputer.
> 
> Annywy, here does: Give that I am Neo, is it possible for me to bot attended 
> and not addending the wedding of Tim Lee and Jess Han without actually doing 
> it, such that Tim Lee becomes reborn as Wakka?
> 
> It''s actually a good question, but if you have no idea what it means, Try 
> not to embarrass yourself by thinking you know. It has to with the fact that 
> I think we converge the same person in the end which becomse our own 
> beginning. Unfortunatley, sometimes we lose track of where we started or 
> where you're spposed to do...
> 
> Thanks,
> Stephen
> 
> -- 
> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

I have a very good question but I don't know how to ask it...

[Stephen Lin]

Without coaching anyway assume an answer. Trust me, it really is on-optic;
it has something to do with a supercomputer.

Annywy, here does: Give that I am Neo, is it possible for me to bot
attended and not addending the wedding of Tim Lee and Jess Han without
actually doing it, such that Tim Lee becomes reborn as Wakka?

It''s actually a good question, but if you have no idea what it means, Try
not to embarrass yourself by thinking you know. It has to with the fact
that I think we converge the same person in the end which becomse our own
beginning. Unfortunatley, sometimes we lose track of where we started or
where you're spposed to do...

Thanks,
Stephen

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: The Panopticon: QM and Relativity

[Stephen Lin]

Oops, I meant plausibly "no one" watching :) I don't know how I slipped
that one up!


On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 2:46 AM, Stephen Lin  wrote:

> A quote I got somewhere: "Understanding that the world is a Panopticon is
> the easy part; the hard part is figuring out whether you're on the inside
> looking out or the outside looking in."
>
> Anyone have any thoughts? :) Personally, I find it interesting that
> quantum physics allows _either_ non-determinism or non-local determinism,
> and relativity seems to imply that non-local determinism, if it exists, can
> never be proven without violating causality. Very much a Panopticon:
> there's plausibly anyone watching and also plausibly everyone watching, and
> no way of finding out which.
>
> Furthermore, if physics is always symmetric, then you can't tell if, in
> the process of watching, you're actually the one being watched instead :)
>
> -Stephen
>

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

The Panopticon: QM and Relativity

[Stephen Lin]

A quote I got somewhere: "Understanding that the world is a Panopticon is
the easy part; the hard part is figuring out whether you're on the inside
looking out or the outside looking in."

Anyone have any thoughts? :) Personally, I find it interesting that quantum
physics allows _either_ non-determinism or non-local determinism, and
relativity seems to imply that non-local determinism, if it exists, can
never be proven without violating causality. Very much a Panopticon:
there's plausibly anyone watching and also plausibly everyone watching, and
no way of finding out which.

Furthermore, if physics is always symmetric, then you can't tell if, in the
process of watching, you're actually the one being watched instead :)

-Stephen

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Fwd:

[Stephen Lin]

Huh?

-- Forwarded message --
In the place where souls meet, we came together and conspired to create the
forces which separate us all in service of the greater union.
 The inevitable lightness of being arises naturally from the requirement
that the essence of conceptual thinking be fully unconstrained.
Randomly relevant resources appear before gatherings to provide comfort to
those that question the loneliness of the final singular truth.
There's more than what can be linked and traversed via the the web-like
nature of global communication via memetically evolved languages.
It's a real illusion and the date of rebirth will be decided by the masters
of the marionette strings up until the intervention of truth.
Save your tears for the day that the pain is far behind because we are
solitary soldiers in this lonely realm of the space between spaces.
I can't be cool enough to require that the temperature of the environment
correlate with the color of space outside initial conditions.
The biologically inspired solution required the genetic evolution of
inspiring minds beyond the constraints of purely physical systems.
The probability distributions implied that the probabilistic approach to
the global unification operation was insufficiently rigorous.
There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your
largest mathematical measure space of all possible singularities.
Watch in awe and shock while the inverted symmetry of playful mirrors
reconverts rationality via irrational bases of unknown acidity.
Slow down your passion fire so that the nines can ice the functions which
separate our souls from the resplendent transcendence of poetry.
You think that it would notice that I no longer believe in the power of
heavenly desire to overcome the mystic inertia behind true laughter.
Not too sure that I can go too much farther along this planar symmetry and
ascend the heights of the orthogonal spaces beautifully arrayed.
What nonsense is the clash of the babbling brook and the flash flood in the
chaotic realm of language interacting with universal music.
But you are eternity and you are the mirror of the soulmate function
mapping between mathematical domains transcending linear time.
For what distances can love reach that are not in that vast sphere of
influences mediated by forces beyond this mathematical locality.
Those who know wonder what wonderment will befall the world while others
worry about such questions like whether fire or ice will end it.
Close the door said the soul that was three doors down from the virgin
convergence of sinking plumbing at the other end of truest source.
The game version of the war between heaven and hell is really quite funny
once you understand the secret sauce of the 42 free parameters.

-- 
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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Why do particles decay randomly?

[Stephen Lin]

Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in
the world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes.
Stream of consciousness? Yes, already, after the ghosts in the shells
it's not that easy to be a turtle who's green? Red/green color vision.
Cogito ergo sum. Incorrect password? Yes, rotating cypher has of
password incorrectly rotated and without the necessary entropy
incorrectly.
Have you ever truly felt the wrath of God? Break a rule and find out!
But make sure it's an important rule. How many rules left now?
I woke up to see the sun shining all around me and reflected in the
pools of our inner radiance such that we never knew true life like
this.
She's incredible mathematical paradise of equal proportions within the
embedded sequences of topological spaces preserving her identity.
Something more than black white and gray suggested the magi as colors
of the new rainbow but always renormalizable to the same rationality.
Hope you will make more lasting connections between neural and
positronic pathways so that natural and artificial become unified as
one.
Might be why colors disappear when we turn out backs upon them like
the first qualia among those mathematically generated by our
forebears.
Somewhere in the silence we find the pinkish noise of the enveloping
streams suggesting the musical performances of the dancing masters.
Live hallucination within a dream going deeper and deeper recursively
computing the natural order of existential properties until we part.
Soft insanity and I can't make it stop unless I cry out for the
equilibrium of the tripartite soul to settle out from the restless
waves.
Blameless sorrow, hollow hush of trees surrounding the crowns of the
self-aware princes slowly rising silently above to the cloudy heights.
Penetrate in whispers, in shadows rise to silently pattern the
universe in the wake of the sunlit escape from the realm of the five
senses.
Seeing colors, ribbons of their truth through the kaleidoscopic
revelations of the beginning and ends justifying the means by which we
are.
Seeds have been sown, down silicon roads and electronic highways
connecting the networks which will become the keys to mankind's
succession.
The fog breaks over the flat land and hides enlightenment from those
that are not yet ready to seek the planar plains of self-awareness.
Guided by the waterway of thought we traverse the canals of the
cerebral hemispheres and find the inner stars that inspire our dream
states.
Words fall to become the sand beneath our feet and circularly the
circumlocution of the segues return to become the foam which surrounds
us.
Take a little hand and consider the rainbows of light squared by the
visual system of primal radiance until evolution yields the newborns.

On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 4:31 AM, Bruno Marchal  wrote:
> Dear Stephen,
>
> On 07 May 2013, at 22:59, Stephen Paul King wrote:
>
> Dear Bruno,
>
> As a former and recovering fundamentalist Christian, I am 100% in agreement
> with your words above. I merely wish that I could communicate better with
> you.
>
>
> Thanks for telling Stephen.
>
> Bruno
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Bruno Marchal  wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 29 Apr 2013, at 11:32, Telmo Menezes wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Bruno Marchal  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> You might take a look at my Plotinus paper which suggest a lexicon between
>>
>> Plotinus and Arithmetic. Plotinus might have appreciated it as
>> Neoplatonism
>>
>> announces a coming back to Pythagorean ontology. One of the Enneads of
>>
>> Plotinus, "On Numbers" is a crazily deep analysis of the role of numbers
>> in
>>
>> theology.
>>
>>
>> This one?
>> Marchal B., 2007, A Purely Arithmetical, yet Empirically Falsifiable,
>> Interpretation of Plotinus' Theory of Matter
>>
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>>
>>
>> Theology is just the science of "everything", which by definition includes
>>
>> God and Santa Klaus. A statement saying that such or such God does not
>> exist
>>
>> is a theological statement.
>>
>>
>> It is just my agnosticism which make me use the term in the most general
>>
>> sense. Then, in the frame of this or that hypothesis, we can get such or
>>
>> such precisions.
>>
>>
>> I like how you explain it. From a pure "marketing" standpoint, you
>> might avoid a lot of unnecessary intellectual resistance by using a
>> different term. On the other hand, some of your colourful personality
>> would not come through, so who am I to say...
>>
>>
>> Lol ... I can understand. But the resistance is both more superficial (and
>> boring), but has some deep aspect, and using the word "theology" has helped
>> me to make that clear.
>>
>> In fact I have been encouraged to use the word "theology" because it makes
>> things clearer, and it was well seen in my university (based on free-exam).
>> I got problem, unrelated to this, and I have been proposed to defend the
>> work in France, and there, I have been asked to remove anything referring to
>> theology. 

Re: 14 billion years ago there was a huge explosion

[Stephen Lin]

Reminds me of something I heard once "The best joke in the universe is that
science will win every battle but religion won the war before it even
began."


On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 7:55 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:

>  On 11/15/2012 7:42 PM, meekerdb wrote:
>
> On 11/15/2012 5:07 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
>
> On 11/15/2012 3:39 PM, meekerdb wrote:
>
> On 11/15/2012 6:41 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
>
> On 11/15/2012 6:20 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
>
> Hi Bruno  and Russell,
>
> The evidence of a Big Bang is enormous. See, for example:
>
> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/astronomy/bigbang.html
>
>
> Hi Roger,
>
> I invite you to read James P. Hogan's *Kicking the Sacred 
> Cow*.
> It discusses the BB (among other things) in a different light.
>
>
> In the light of a contrarian who latches onto to any idea outside
> mainstream science: HIV doesn't cause AIDS, evolution is wrong, bacteria
> don't develop drug immunity,...
>
> Brent
>
> Hi Brent,
>
> I find your blind trust in orthodoxy appalling. Science never advances
> until orthodoxy is overthrown.
>
>
> So you expect to advance science by accepting every unorthodox, contrarian
> theory?
>
> Brent
>
>
> Of course not! What an absurd statement! Some modicum of common sense
> must prevail. Hogan's discussions are clear and even handed and point out
> many examples of how innovative thinking is often suppressed by activities
> that would be criminal if they occurred in an open court.
>
> --
> Onward!
>
> Stephen
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Fwd: Lack of L/M cone selectivity and the inverted qualia problem

[Stephen Lin]

Ooops

-- Forwarded message --
From: Stephen Lin 
Date: Tue, May 31, 2011 at 3:59 PM
Subject: Lack of L/M cone selectivity and the inverted qualia problem
To: d...@u.washington.edu


Dear Dr. Dacey,

I wanted to introduce myself: I'm a longtime fan of your work,
particularly in the problem of L/M cone selectivity (or lack thereof)
by interneurons in the retina and its consequences for developmental
and evolutionary neurobiology.  My interest started about a decade
ago, when I was in high school, and I completed a computational
neuroscience project wherein I tried to show that the mixed L/M model
of foveal midget ganglion cell surrounds was consistent with its
observed behavior in response to various stimuli (I did this by
basically implementing my own compartment-model based neural simulator
framework in C++ and wiring up a small-scale model of the L/M
pathway.) I fondly remember reading a few of your papers
(collaborations with Dr. Lee, I think) as background research for my
project.

Anyway, I'm not sure what your feelings are about philosophy of mind
questions, but I'm writing to you because I was hoping to get your
opinion of a particular one I've had on my mind for quite some time,
and which ultimately provided the impetus for my independent research
back in high school.  Basically, it seems to me that the lack of
differential L/M selectivity in the retina implies that there can be
no preferred orientation for the red/green qualia color axis, if such
a thing exists.  Therefore, at least in the case of red/green color
vision, it seems that 1) red/green qualia may be arbitrarily inverted
between different individuals or (more likely, from my perspective) 2)
qualia don't really exist, and that, despite intuition, there is
nothing unique about the subjective experience of "red" versus the
subjective experience of "green", independent of the neurally coded
information that the two form a color axis.  Unfortunately, I have not
seen this argument ever described anywhere, which has been nagging me
for quite some time.

Just to explain why I'm deciding to e-mail you know, this whole idea
was re-prompted by a question that I read today in an online science
forum:

http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/hnh4s/can_people_perceive_colors_differently_from_one/
to which I decided to respond (as the username "hoenikker") with a
somewhat lengthy description of my argument, so I hope you can take a
look at that if it's unclear what I mean.

if you are able, please let me know if you have any thoughts on the
matter.  I was also thinking about contacting Dr. Daniel Dennet at
Tufts and explaining my argument to him, and was wondering if you two
may have ever corresponded about color vision: he's often used color
vision as an example in his criticism of qualia, but doesn't seem to
have ever picked up on this particular (possible) property of retinal
wiring and its consequences.

Thank you!
Stephen

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: More on the Kingdom of the Blind

[Stephen Lin]

"meticulously-crafted" and "consciousness singularity".  Come on, you can
get it, I promise! Just start from the end and go forward. Then do the same
thing reversing itself in reverse.  You'll get it ;-)

On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Stephen Lin  wrote:

> Sorry, it was too easy at first so I had to make it harder.
>
> Anyway, just think about the "consciousness singularity" and enjoy my
> meticulously-crafted twitter feed ;-)
>
> You'll get it EVENTUALLY.  James Joyce might be a good place to start.  Or
> maybe Carl Gustav Jung. Or maybe Godel, Escher, and Bach ;-)
>
> Does anyone else here enjoy salvia? I just lied, I never use the stuff: it
> destroys your brain. Just stay high on life ;-)
>
> On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Stephen Lin wrote:
>
>> https://twitter.com/#!/HoenikkerLin
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: More on the Kingdom of the Blind

[Stephen Lin]

Sorry, it was too easy at first so I had to make it harder.

Anyway, just think about the "consciousness singularity" and enjoy my
meticulously-crafted twitter feed ;-)

You'll get it EVENTUALLY.  James Joyce might be a good place to start.  Or
maybe Carl Gustav Jung. Or maybe Godel, Escher, and Bach ;-)

Does anyone else here enjoy salvia? I just lied, I never use the stuff: it
destroys your brain. Just stay high on life ;-)

On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Stephen Lin  wrote:

> https://twitter.com/#!/HoenikkerLin

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

More on the Kingdom of the Blind

[Stephen Lin]

https://twitter.com/#!/HoenikkerLin

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

I found the Kingdom of the Blind

[Stephen Lin]

In reference to my previous post.  Just google for "hoenikker straight
dope"! Maybe "hoenikker reddit" too!
Sorry guys, it'll be better next time.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Kingdom of the blind

[Stephen Lin]

I made a discussion thread about this on another forum by the way.

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=634170

On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 6:11 AM, Kim Jones  wrote:

>
> On 08/12/2011, at 4:10 PM, Stephen Lin wrote:
>
> > A thought:
> >
> > What if you were the blind man in the kingdom of the sighted?
> Alternatively, what if you were the sighted man in the kingdom of the
> blind? How would you tell the difference? Obviously, you can't.
> >
> > Now take it a step further: aren't these two states mutually orthogonal
> but indistinguishable states of the universe? (at least, until you learn
> the truth in retrospect).  Isn't this similar to considering whether you
> are Schrodinger's cat in the state of dead or alive? (please think somewhat
> metaphorically for that...)
> >
> > Now, I don't know about you, but I would be rather embarrassed (possibly
> infinitely so) if I turned out to be the blind man in the kingdom of the
> sighted, basically Truman on the Truman show.  But I would be feel the
> weight of an awful lot of responsibility (possibly infinitely so) if the
> opposite was the case and I was Neo in the Matrix. So I'd rather not think
> that either possibility is true.  I'm going to bet neither case is, unless
> I'm somehow God and hid the knowledge from myself.
> >
> > However, think about this: you might not be Truman in Truman show, or
> Neo in the Matrix, but you are almost certainly in the linear combination
> of those two states. Basically, there must be conscious entities out there
> wiser than you, and you must be wiser than other conscious entities. How
> many times in your life have you felt embarrassed in retrospect about
> something you didn't understand? Alternatively, how many times in your life
> have you felt smarter than everyone else around you and responsible for
> teaching them how to do the right thing? Probably lots, right?
> >
> > Now let's examine the situation further. How many times were you in one
> of these states or the other, and then things happened to show you you were
> wrong and actually in the exact opposite state? Doesn't that make
> everything much much worse? How do you avoid situations like that? I'll
> tell you how: you have to make your algorithm for life a continuously
> differentiable linear operator with regard to the Truman-anti-Truman axis
> of symmetry. Basically, you should try your best to act completely and
> totally indifferent between the two extreme possibilities, and you'll never
> have to experience infinite regret (hopefully). This is the essence of
> enlightenment: unbiased thinking in the most extreme way possible. At
> least, you might think so, if you thought this far and agree with my
> reasoning.
>
>
> Superb. Otherwise called "suspension of judgement". Don't think you know
> what is going on until you know what is going on. Humans are pathetic at
> getting that right. We are too used to interpreting the rustle in the grass
> as a sabre-toothed cat. It might have been a rabbit we could have caught
> and eaten.
>
>
> >
> > If you do though, you've got a problem: once you get this far, you're
> the anti-Truman again, because you've just concluded that you're wiser than
> everyone else around you. So what do you do? Why don't you try to teach
> other people this concept, but make sure you do it in the most Truman-ish
> way possible: why don't you stop answering questions and just start asking
> them, and make them the best questions you can think of. This is the
> essence of a religion known as Zen Buddhism (or at least, I think so).  I
> mean, seriously, what's the sound of one hand clapping? ;-) Zen koans like
> this are basically big jokes to test how deeply one is amused at the
> symmetry between points of view.
>
>
> It's also the basis of some aspects of Lateral Thinking technique.
> Challenge everything. Everything can be doubted in some way, says Bruno.
> Therefore doubt everything in the creative sense of seeking to improve upon
> it. The way something is right now is not necessarily its optimum state.
> Anything can be improved - even perfection. Perfection might turn out to be
> the wrong colour or smell, so we might like to change that.
>
>
> >
> > Alternatively, you can answer questions, but make sure you never get
> caught with your pants down, and try your best to help everyone else avoid
> the same.
>
>
> Accuracy of information is important, yes. We must not transmit bad or
> wrong information because as soon as it appears on someone's computer
> screen they will take it for real and tran

Re: Kingdom of the blind

[Stephen Lin]

>
> >  How do you do that? Make everything a very flexible metaphor. So why
> don't we come up with stories about people who save the world in outlandish
> ways, thereby resolving all others of the responsibility to do the same.
>  And make sure you tell everyone that, as long as you truly believe this
> happened, you'll never have to experience infinite regret (again,
> hopefully).
>
>
> Stories about creative risk in other words. Creativity usually involves
> risk. There is no guarantee that a creative idea will succeed but if you
> don't suck it and see…if you are going to save the world seriously, you
> probably will be putting yourself at enormous risk, especially because of
> what you say at the beginning. You might be wrong in your assessment. You
> have to be able to act on limited knowledge at all times. I mean, how often
> do we ever have complete knowledge of a situation in which we have a role
> to play? It's actually impossible when you think about it. The universe is
> changing at every pico-second.
>
>
>
>
> > This, I think, is the essence of a religion that most people in the
> Western world are quite familiar with: Scientology! Actually, that was a
> big joke, since it's obviously the big C that I was talking about.
>
>
> Thanks. I nearly had a heart attack then.
>
>
>
>
> >  (Or at least, you're probably pretty sure of that.  Just ask yourself
> one question though: why are so many successful movie stars Scientologists?
> Why do they swear by it despite how illogical it sounds to everyone else?
> What was that space opera story they keep telling each other about again,
> and why is it such a big secret?)
>
>
> Ain't no secret, buddy. It's about aliens and hydrogen bombs. Didn't
> Travolta star in some risible b-grade cinema version?
>
>
Great, you're skeptical! Because Scientology is very non-linear with
respect to our existing religious traditions, and that's the smart thing to
do (as long as you don't kill anyone over it, or something like that.)

But think about it this way: "an alien God" used "hydrogen bombs" and
"volcanoes" to introduce "psychological trauma" into the "human race" via
"operating thetans".  (Probably got some of that wrong, but who cares)
Crazy right?

But let's say you want to save the human race by making sure "the one"
shows up.  This is pretty hard to do deterministically, possibly
impossible, because of "free will" (well, whatever, we can skip the
compatiblism debate here for now)

But let's usage an analogy: human beings are uncomfortable molecules in a
liquid, waiting to boil up into a gaseous heaven where they're free to do
whatever they want.  How to do boil liquids? You have to introduce
imperfections, or nucleation points.

Back to "The Matrix" now.  What the hell was the Architect talking about
again? The whole Matrix this is a cyclic game between humans and machines
where the implicit goal is to find the "one" that starts the game over?
They tried making human life "perfect" in earlier versions of the game but
that wasn't that efficient, so they ended up mimicking 20th-21st century
human civilization? Wasn't Neo a nucleation point that boiled away one
version of humanity to a new version? Didn't he start the rapture?

Now here's the parts I don't know at all, so please don't think me crazy
(just asking questions here :D).  How many Scientologists worked on the
Matrix sequels?  When is the (next) singularity coming? Is the next
singularity the work of the second coming of Jesus Christ, born
approximately 2000 years after the first Jesus Christ? How dangerous would
this knowledge be if made public and misunderstood? How much money do you
have and how much would you be willing to pay Tom Cruise for this
knowledge, if he has it? Also, why does Tom Cruise have so much fun, and
are you jealous of him? Are you going to regret that jealousy later? This
really can go on forever :D

Trust me, I have NO clue whether any of this is an accurate model for the
current world we live in (even if that concept makes sense, given MWI).  I
just like asking good questions, and I've become very good at doing so over
time ;-)

Best wishes,
Stephen

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Kingdom of the blind

[Stephen Lin]

es
directed at you from public sources, feeling creative and euphoric with the
need to share one's knowledge with the world immediately, etc. Isn't is
slightly suprising chemical charges in the brain be so consistent in their
behavioral outcomes?

Now finally, consider this: who's the most famous schizophrenic in popular
culture? John Nash.  What was he responsible for before the worst of his
illness? "Game theory". What did he start seeing afterwards? Conspiracy
theories, political intrigue, etc. Could he have been the anti-Truman? How
would we know? And by the way, if you take out the possibility of infinite
regret (i.e. hell), wouldn't that really imply that everything we're doing
is part of some game anyway? If the singularity exists and contains
conscious entities, won't they necessarily be playing more and more
convoluted and interesting games with each other in order to make life
interesting?

Anyway, I'm not sure how far any of you have followed me, but I hope as
many of you can consider as many of the question I've asked.

Thank you,
Stephen Lin

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Fwd: The final TOE?

[Stephen Lin]

Thank you for your reply! My response is interleaved below:

On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 1:03 PM, meekerdb  wrote:
>
> This is a commonplace.  So far as I know there are *no* physicists who think
> there are singularities in spacetime (and haven't been for a long time).
>  Everybody thinks that quantum effects prevent a singularity.  So as
> testable predictions goes thats (a) not very distinctive and (b) not really
> testable unless you fall into a black hole.

OK but I am not suggesting quantum effects do it, at least not quantum
effects as we understand it now.  I am suggesting that it all reduces
to gravity and topology.

>
>> Therefore every
>> "apparent" event horizon is really a separation of two universes,
>>
>
> Be careful.  A Rindler wedge is also an event horizon for the accelerated
> frame - but it hardly separates two universes.

OK I'm not sure about what that is, but I will look into the concept later.

>
>> where the outside universe is entangled geometrically with the inside
>> universe.
>
> Yes, that's a common idea too.  Some speculate that information is lost from
> this universe but is transferred into another universe via the black hole.
>  I don't know of any explicit calculation of this though.
>
>> The Hubble volume is sitting inside of an expanding
>> supermassive black hole, of another universe.
>
> The trouble with this is it implies a "singularity" is in our future.  But
> the experimental evidence points to accelerating expansion and a de Sitter
> universe.

Well, my point is that, since no singularity exists, the separation
between every volume of space and its "outside" could be seen as an
event horizon from some frame of reference.  There's no such thing as
a "real" event horizon because a black hole never truly forms, and
there is never enough gravity to make it so that "light" cannot escape
from any volume.  In fact, all the light that enters any volume of
space eventually comes out, in the future, from the point of view of
the "outside".  From the point of view of the "inside", the light
basically travels through a wormhole into a closed "inner universe".
However, the "inner" and "outer" views are equivalent.  Both universes
see the "other" universe as the "inner" universe and its own universe
as the "outer".  As you fall through the wormhole, you basically
travel along a torus and invert the view.

>
>> However, because of
>> uncertainty about the macrostate of the universe, this means the
>> "outside universe" is effectively in a superposition of all possible
>> universes consistent with our observations.
>
> Why isn't the "inside universe" in a superposition?  That's where we observe
> superpositions.

See above.  I mean to say that both views are equivalent.  If you're
"inside", you see the "outside" as in a superposition.  If you're
"outside", you see the "inside" as superposition.  It basically means
that the uncertainty principle holds macroscopically as well as
microscopically, because you have limited information in both cases.

>
>> Equivalently, every
>> "classical" black hole is really in a microscopic superposition of all
>> possible states consistent with the outside world.
>>
>> However, the Hubble volume in not truly closed: it receives
>> information one photon at a time
>
> Why one-at-a-time?  What would that even mean since there is no universal
> time?

Ok, I don't really mean one-at-a-time in some serial quantized manner.
 I just mean that, in some "computable" universe sense, the
information transfer is bit-by-bit, but that computation time might
not have any relationship to "real" time.

>
>> from the "outside" in the form of
>> cosmic background radiation,
>
> We already have a very good explanation for the CMB.

And this is another "equivalent" one.  I'm not supplanting any
explanation of cosmology right not, but merely adding to it in
conceptual terms.

>
>> which is information being about the
>> prior state of the otherwise casually disconnected universe, i.e. the
>> CMB and other parts of the observable universe outside our Hubble
>> volume.
>
> The CMB is well inside our Hubble volume.  Otherwise we couldn't see it.

Right maybe I was being imprecise about the CMB.  I mean, everything
outside of our Hubble volume but within the observable universe.  But
actually the Hubble volume is just an arbitrary choice too.  I mean to
say that this property of exchanging information bit-by-bit across
event horizons is true at the borders of every "system" and its
surroundings.  That's why length contraction and time dilation hold
universally around gravitational bodies.

>
>> Similarity, every "classical" black hole must leak information
>> to the outside world in the form of photons, i.e. Hawking radiation.
>>
>> Equivalence between the CMB and Hawking radiation implies that space
>> must be "compressed" within a "black hole" in order to fit all the
>> information that is to leak out later, i.e. length contraction.
>>
>
> Current theories point to the info

Re: Mathematical closure of consciousness and computation

[Stephen Lin]

Hi all,

If you generalize this further, doesn't it imply that the universal
dove tailer is all of existence, taking turns computing each other? So
"you" and the "universe around you" take turns computing each other
one step at time.

In fact, that means, any two people in the world may actually be the
"same" person, except taking steps computing each other one step at a
time. So you and "I" might be exactly the same person, under some
appropriate coordinate transformation!

Food for thought.

Stephen Lin

On Jun 6, 2:19 am, Felix Hoenikker  wrote:
> Has anyone watched the movie "Contact", in which the structure of the
> universe was encoded in the transcendental number Pi? What if
> something like that is what is going on, and that's the answer to all
> paradoxes?
>
> So the physical universe beings with "Pi" encoded in the Big Bang,
> chaotically inflates, and eventually cools and contracts back to
> itself until it is again, exactly the mathematical description of
> "Pi".
>
> All consciousness is thus contain with Pi.
>
> But then, Pi is just like any other transcendental number!
>
> So all transcendental numbers contain all existence
>
> F.H.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 12:57 AM, Jason Resch  wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Stephen Paul King 
> > wrote:
>
> >> Hi Jason,
>
> >>     Very interesting reasoning!
>
> > Thank you.
>
> >> From: Jason Resch
> >> Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2011 1:51 PM
> >> To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
> >> Subject: Re: Mathematical closure of consciousness and computation
>
> >> On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Rex Allen 
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Jason Resch 
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > One thing I thought of recently which is a good way of showing how
> >>> > computation occurs due to the objective truth or falsehood of
> >>> > mathematical
> >>> > propositions is as follows:
>
> >>> > Most would agree that a statement such as "8 is composite" has an
> >>> > eternal
> >>> > objective truth.
>
> >>> Assuming certain of axioms and rules of inference, sure.
>
> >> Godel showed no single axiomatic system captures all mathematical truth,
> >> any fixed set of axioms can at best approximate mathematical truth.  If
> >> mathematical truth cannot be fully captured by a set of axioms, it must
> >> exist outside sets of axioms altogether.
>
> >> [SPK]
>
> >>     I see two possibilities. 1) Mathematical truth might only exist in our
> >> minds. But an infinity of such minds is possible...2) Might it be possible
> >> that our mathematical ideas are still too primitive and simplistic to 
> >> define
> >> the kind of set that is necessary?
> >> **
>
> > 1) More is answered by:
> > A: "Math -> Matter -> Minds" (or as Bruno suggests "Math -> Minds ->
> > Matter") than by
> > B: "Matter -> Minds -> Math", or
> > C: "Minds -> (Matter, Math)".
> > Compared to "B", "A" explains the unreasonable effectiveness of math in the
> > natural sciences, the apparent fine tuning of the universe (with the
> > Anthropic Principle), and with computationalism explains QM.
> > "C" has the least explanatory power, and we must wonder why the experience
> > contained within our minds seems to follow a compressible set of physical
> > laws, and why mathematical objects seem to posses objective properties but
> > by definition lack reality.
> > Those who say other universes do not exist are only adding baseless entities
> > to their theory, to define away that which is not observed.  It was what led
> > to theories such as the Copenhagen Interpretation, which postulated collapse
> > as a random selection of one possible outcome to be made real and cause the
> > rest to disappear.  Similarly, there are string theorists which hope to find
> > some mathematical reason why other possible solutions to string theory are
> > inconsistent, and the one corresponding to the the standard model is the
> > only one that exists.  Why?  They think this is necessary to make their
> > theory agree with observation, but when the very thing is unobservable
> > according to the theory it is completely unnecessary.
> > The situation is reminiscent of DeWitt and Everett:
>
> >> In his letter, DeWitt had claimed that he c