...@verizon.net]
1/17/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-17, 06:08:26
Subject: Re: MWI as an ontological error, it should be TwoAspects Theory
On 16 Jan
Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Craig Weinberg
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-13, 09:48:20
Subject: Re: Re: MWI as an ontological error, it should be TwoAspects
Theory
On Sunday, January 13, 2013 7:56:25 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Richard
as an ontological error, it should be TwoAspects Theory
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
, 10:59:12
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: MWI as an ontological error,it should be TwoAspects
Theory
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
:03
Subject: Re: Re: Re: MWI as an ontological error, it should be TwoAspects
Theory
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
Subject: Re: MWI as an ontological error, it should be TwoAspects Theory
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
:52
Subject: Re: MWI as an ontological error, it should be TwoAspects Theory
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
-list
Time: 2013-01-16, 11:23:57
Subject: Re: MWI as an ontological error, it should be TwoAspects Theory
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 14 Jan 2013, at 18:11, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 13 Jan
the following content -
From: Craig Weinberg
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-14, 11:51:03
Subject: Re: Re: Re: MWI as an ontological error, it should be TwoAspects
Theory
On Monday, January 14, 2013 7:06:57 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
Why
-
From: Craig Weinberg
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-13, 09:48:20
Subject: Re: Re: MWI as an ontological error, it should be TwoAspects Theory
On Sunday, January 13, 2013 7:56:25 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Richard Ruquist
EM waves are physical and exist in spacetime
as an ontological error, it should be TwoAspects Theory
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
the following content -
From: Craig Weinberg
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-13, 09:48:20
Subject: Re: Re: MWI as an ontological error, it should be TwoAspects
Theory
On Sunday, January 13, 2013 7:56:25 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Richard Ruquist
EM waves
as an ontological error, it should be TwoAspects Theory
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 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
: Re: MWI as an ontological error, it should be TwoAspects Theory
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
16 matches
Mail list logo
