Tim May wrote
>(I was struck by the point that the sequence "1, 2, 4, 8" is the only
>sequence satisfying certain properties--the only "scalars, vectors,
>quaternions, octonions" there can be--and that the sequence "3, 4, 6,
>10," just 2 higher than the first sequence, is closely related to
>a
Tim May wrote
>(I was struck by the point that the sequence "1, 2, 4, 8" is the only
>sequence satisfying certain properties--the only "scalars, vectors,
>quaternions, octonions" there can be--and that the sequence "3, 4, 6,
>10," just 2 higher than the first sequence, is closely related to
>a
Regarding octonions, sedenions and physics
Tony Smith has a huge amount of pertinent ideas on his website, e.g.
http://www.innerx.net/personal/tsmith/QOphys.html
http://www.innerx.net/personal/tsmith/d4d5e6hist.html
His ideas are colorful and speculative, but also deep and interesting.
One co
RS wrote on one level how the algorithmic revolution
was "epistemological". I objected to this partly. let me
quote the dictionary defn of epistemology
epistemology-- the branch of philosophy that deals with
the nature and theory of knowledge.
now in newtons time, science was seen as a branch o
wolfram at comdex on the "universe as software" idea etc
http://news.com.com/2100-1040-93.html
When you look at the bottom of the well,
all the way
deep down,
you see yourself staring right back at you.
And right now you look like an algorithm.
Oh well, there was a time when you looked like clockwork
Maybe tomorrow you'll be a brain.
And the day after tomorrow maybe a quantum device.
The u
6 matches
Mail list logo
