On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 4:48 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> and have a relatively small number of degrees of freedom.
>
> >> That is nonsense, the entire advantage of Quantum Computers is that
> they have vastly more degrees of freedom than a
...@gmail.com wrote:
Really Craig? It invalidates mechanistic assumptions about eyes? I'm sure
the researchers would be astonished at such a wild conclusion. All the
research shows is brain plasticity in interpreting signals from unusual
neural pathways. How does that invalidate mechanism?
Yes, I
:
Really Craig? It invalidates mechanistic assumptions about eyes? I'm
sure
the researchers would be astonished at such a wild conclusion. All the
research shows is brain plasticity in interpreting signals from unusual
neural pathways. How does that invalidate mechanism?
It's not that wild
On Monday, March 4, 2013 11:27:21 PM UTC-5, Pierz wrote:
Really Craig? It invalidates mechanistic assumptions about eyes? I'm sure
the researchers would be astonished at such a wild conclusion. All the
research shows is brain plasticity in interpreting signals from unusual
neural pathways
On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 2:43:26 AM UTC-5, jessem wrote:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:27 PM, Pierz pie...@gmail.com javascript:wrote:
Really Craig? It invalidates mechanistic assumptions about eyes? I'm sure
the researchers would be astonished at such a wild conclusion. All the
research
Hi Craig,
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, March 4, 2013 11:27:21 PM UTC-5, Pierz wrote:
Really Craig? It invalidates mechanistic assumptions about eyes? I'm sure
the researchers would be astonished at such a wild conclusion. All
On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 8:39:37 AM UTC-5, telmo_menezes wrote:
Hi Craig,
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Craig Weinberg
whats...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
On Monday, March 4, 2013 11:27:21 PM UTC-5, Pierz wrote:
Really Craig? It invalidates mechanistic assumptions about
On 05 Mar 2013, at 08:43, Jesse Mazer wrote:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:27 PM, Pierz pier...@gmail.com wrote:
Really Craig? It invalidates mechanistic assumptions about eyes? I'm
sure the researchers would be astonished at such a wild conclusion.
All the research shows is brain plasticity
On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 12:45:11 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 05 Mar 2013, at 08:43, Jesse Mazer wrote:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:27 PM, Pierz pie...@gmail.com javascript:wrote:
Really Craig? It invalidates mechanistic assumptions about eyes? I'm sure
the researchers would
Really Craig? It invalidates mechanistic assumptions about eyes? I'm sure the
researchers would be astonished at such a wild conclusion. All the research
shows is brain plasticity in interpreting signals from unusual neural pathways.
How does that invalidate mechanism?
--
You received
On 3/4/2013 8:27 PM, Pierz wrote:
Really Craig? It invalidates mechanistic assumptions about eyes? I'm sure the
researchers would be astonished at such a wild conclusion. All the research
shows is brain plasticity in interpreting signals from unusual neural pathways.
How does that invalidate
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:27 PM, Pierz pier...@gmail.com wrote:
Really Craig? It invalidates mechanistic assumptions about eyes? I'm sure
the researchers would be astonished at such a wild conclusion. All the
research shows is brain plasticity in interpreting signals from unusual
neural
Supports my view of sense, Invalidates mechanistic assumptions about eyes.
The genie about the reality of sense just doesn't seem to want to stay in
the bottle...
Craig
http://www.newswise.com/articles/ectopic-eyes-function-without-connection-to-brain
*Experiments with tadpoles show ectopic
Contest by FQXi
http://www.fqxi.org/community/essay
Click Read the contest entries to find it out.
Evgenii
--
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
If I’ve Googled “diabetes” for a friend or “date rape drugs” for a
mystery I’m writing, data aggregators assume those searches reflect my
own health and proclivities.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/05/opinion/sunday/facebook-is-using-you.html
--
You received this message because you are
Le 21-févr.-08, à 15:01, Lennart Nilsson a écrit :
Oh, I am very much proEverett and proDeutsch and, I might add
proStandish
(having translated his book Theory of Nothing into swedish). And you
are
right of course, it was your assumptions I questioned...
OK, and I said : No problem
Le 21-févr.-08, à 15:01, Lennart Nilsson a écrit :
Oh, I am very much proEverett and proDeutsch and, I might add
proStandish
(having translated his book Theory of Nothing into swedish). And you
are
right of course, it was your assumptions I questioned...
OK, no problem then,
Have
much proEverett and proDeutsch and, I might add proStandish
(having translated his book Theory of Nothing into swedish). And you are
right of course, it was your assumptions I questioned...
LN
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you
Bruno,
I willbe thrilled: I oogled Plotinus and numbers and
now I lost even that faint idea I had about them.
As for assumptions: you {assume that on your
assumptions the position willo be an AMEN.
What i asked is: how about: I don't assume so maybe
just that I find the assumption exaggrerated
I'd rather be reading quantum physics, but...
- Original Message -
From: Lee Corbin
To: everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Challenging the Basic Assumptions
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 18:53:34 -0700
aet writes
Jesse [writes] but hey, this list is all about rambling speculations
aet writes
Jesse [writes]
but hey, this list is all about rambling speculations about
half-formed ideas that probably won't pan out to anything,
you could just as easily level the same accusation against
anyone here.
Well, a number of us are under the impression that we are being
very
21 matches
Mail list logo
