On 16 Jan 2013, at 17:23, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 14 Jan 2013, at 18:11, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Bruno Marchal
marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 13 Jan 2013, at 05:34, Richard Ruquist
On 16 Jan 2013, at 17:30, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 15 Jan 2013, at 16:24, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
What do you mean by quantum mind?
keep in
On 16 Jan 2013, at 17:30, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
I seem to have been using words sloppily. You can't get away with that
with a mathematician :-)
Let me try again.
The phenomenol is what appears to be out there.
OK, but it is not only that. In fact, with the exception of
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 16 Jan 2013, at 17:30, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 15 Jan 2013, at 16:24, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Bruno Marchal
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 5:54 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 16 Jan 2013, at 17:23, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 14 Jan 2013, at 18:11, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Bruno
Hi Bruno Marchal
The self-reference to phenomenol perception shows up
in the monad for an object, which is always from that
monad's pov.
The convolution operator is just a conjecture, since it
appears in systems theory and signal processing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convolution
In
On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 6:31:51 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
1) Good point. So far, there is only indirect evidence of gravity waves.
http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=15438
2) Potential energy is more than conceptual, it is the elastic energy
stored
in rocks
On 17 Jan 2013, at 14:49, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
You are right.
But UDA shows that if comp is correct, and QM is correct, then
the second
has to be a mathematical consequence of the first.
Agreed, just as I put
Hi Stephen P. King
Ultimately the PEH.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/17/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Stephen P. King
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-16, 17:47:35
Subject: Re: MWI as
Hi Craig Weinberg
Sorry, I'm missing your point. What is it ?
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/17/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Craig Weinberg
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-17,
On Thursday, January 17, 2013 11:54:03 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Sorry, I'm missing your point. What is it ?
You said Potential energy is more than conceptual, so I am explaining why
I disagree. Potential energy is entirely conceptual, just like any other
potential,
Hi Bruno Marchal
The senses convert the phenomenol space-time world out there
into nonphysical perceived entities which are stored
internally as memories.
A memory is experienced internally, so no space-time.
Then one might say that 1p is the black box that converts
MY view of the
On 14 Jan 2013, at 18:11, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 13 Jan 2013, at 05:34, Richard Ruquist wrote:
That's because they don't consider that matter is inherently
sensitive.
I do. In my model of reality all matter is
On 16 Jan 2013, at 13:24, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
The senses convert the phenomenol space-time world out there
I don't grasp how something phenomenal can be out there.
into nonphysical perceived entities which are stored
internally as memories.
A memory is experienced
On 15 Jan 2013, at 16:24, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
What do you mean by quantum mind?
keep in mind that with comp we cannot assume the quantum. It is has
to be
derived from the digital seen from inside.
And I am not sure
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 14 Jan 2013, at 18:11, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 13 Jan 2013, at 05:34, Richard Ruquist wrote:
That's because they don't consider that
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 15 Jan 2013, at 16:24, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
What do you mean by quantum mind?
keep in mind that with comp we cannot assume the quantum. It is
Hi Bruno Marchal
I seem to have been using words sloppily. You can't get away with that
with a mathematician :-)
Let me try again.
The phenomenol is what appears to be out there.
And yes, the experience of it is internal.
And you said:
I am OK with this, but no need of a black post in
Leibniz's perception isn't really instantly and continuous, it's more like a
slide show.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/16/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Richard Ruquist
Receiver:
On 1/16/2013 11:34 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Leibniz's perception isn't really instantly and continuous, it's more like a
slide show.
Hi Roger,
What determines the sequencing of the 'slides' and their rate of
transition?
--
Onward!
Stephen
--
You received this message because you are
Hi Craig Weinberg
1) Good point. So far, there is only indirect evidence of gravity waves.
http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=15438
2) Potential energy is more than conceptual, it is the elastic energy stored
in rocks etc. by misfit, by irregular flow of the surrounding material.
Like the
On 13 Jan 2013, at 20:05, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Sunday, January 13, 2013 11:57:48 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 12 Jan 2013, at 13:01, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Hi Roger,
How can you have a wave without some notion of spatial/temporal
dimensions?
I don't see why we cannot have
On 13 Jan 2013, at 21:13, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 12 Jan 2013, at 16:33, Richard Ruquist wrote:
EM waves and fields clearly exist in spacetime. Yet I would classify
them along with quantum waves as part of the
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
What do you mean by quantum mind?
keep in mind that with comp we cannot assume the quantum. It is has to be
derived from the digital seen from inside.
And I am not sure we can choose the computations we are in, no more
Hi Craig Weinberg
Why not ? There are gravitational waves.
But earthquakes usually initiate waves
by the sudden release of potential energy.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/14/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content
Hi Richard Ruquist
OK--- in the mind.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/14/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Richard Ruquist
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-13, 08:45:18
Subject: Re: Re: MWI
On 13 Jan 2013, at 05:34, Richard Ruquist wrote:
Craig,
You sound like the ultimate flower girl, all touchy and feelie.
However, yo might very well be right.
Richard
Craig is often right, or well inspired, from the comp perspective.
But he is not valid when thinking that what he says needs
On Monday, January 14, 2013 7:06:57 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Why not ? There are gravitational waves.
How do you know there are gravitational waves?
But earthquakes usually initiate waves
by the sudden release of potential energy.
Potential energy is
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 13 Jan 2013, at 05:34, Richard Ruquist wrote:
Craig,
You sound like the ultimate flower girl, all touchy and feelie.
However, yo might very well be right.
Richard
Craig is often right, or well inspired, from the
On Monday, January 14, 2013 12:11:58 PM UTC-5, yanniru wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Bruno Marchal
mar...@ulb.ac.bejavascript:
wrote:
On 13 Jan 2013, at 05:34, Richard Ruquist wrote:
That's because they don't consider that matter is inherently
sensitive.
I do. In
Hi Richard Ruquist
EM waves are physical and exist in spacetime.
You can capture them with an antenna, etc.
I see nothing especially wrong with the rest of you comments,
you seem to have some interesting ideas.
Thoughts travel instantly, but EM waves
are physical (electrons) and so
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
Thoughts travel instantly, but EM waves
are physical (electrons) and so must travel at the speed of light
Agreed Roger,But IMO em waves and quantum waves, like thoughts in the
quantum mind, can collapse instantly to make
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 8:45 AM, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Roger wrote:
but EM waves
are physical (electrons)
However, EM waves collapse to photons, not electrons. And I would put
EM waves on the mental side and photons on the physical side. But
light seems to bridge the
On Sunday, January 13, 2013 7:56:25 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Richard Ruquist
EM waves are physical and exist in spacetime.
You can capture them with an antenna, etc.
Does an Earthquake capture a wave that is independent of the Earth?
From my view, the EM waves *are* the
On Saturday, January 12, 2013 11:34:37 PM UTC-5, yanniru wrote:
Craig,
You sound like the ultimate flower girl, all touchy and feelie.
However, yo might very well be right.
Richard
Mother nature's son?
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Craig Weinberg
On 12 Jan 2013, at 13:01, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Hi Roger,
How can you have a wave without some notion of spatial/temporal
dimensions?
I don't see why we cannot have purely mathematical waves (easily
related to lines and circles), and physical waves, like water wave or
tsunami, or
On 12 Jan 2013, at 16:33, Richard Ruquist wrote:
EM waves and fields clearly exist in spacetime. Yet I would classify
them along with quantum waves as part of the quantum mind and
nonphysical.
The photon particle and quantum particles appear to bridge the gap
between the physical and the mind
On Sunday, January 13, 2013 11:57:48 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 12 Jan 2013, at 13:01, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Hi Roger,
How can you have a wave without some notion of spatial/temporal dimensions?
I don't see why we cannot have purely mathematical waves (easily related
to lines
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 12 Jan 2013, at 16:33, Richard Ruquist wrote:
EM waves and fields clearly exist in spacetime. Yet I would classify
them along with quantum waves as part of the quantum mind and
nonphysical.
The photon particle and
Hi everything-list,
I don't believe that Descartes would accept the MWI.
Here's why:
I think that the ManyWorldsInterpretation of QM is incorrect,
due to the mistaken notion (IMHO) that quantum waves
are physical waves, so that everything is physical and materialistic.
This seems to deny
Hi Roger,
How can you have a wave without some notion of spatial/temporal dimensions?
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
Hi everything-list,
I don't believe that Descartes would accept the MWI.
Here's why:
I think that the ManyWorldsInterpretation
On Saturday, January 12, 2013 10:33:11 AM UTC-5, yanniru wrote:
EM waves and fields clearly exist in spacetime.
How do you know that they don't exist in matter?
Yet I would classify
them along with quantum waves as part of the quantum mind and
nonphysical.
I don't see anything as
42 matches
Mail list logo
