Re: To observe is to......

2006-10-18 Thread David Nyman
Colin Geoffrey Hales wrote: [Colin] > I know enough about EC. You know enough about COMP. The goal is to get to > a more concrete formal understanding of the difference between reality and > computation, physics, logic, maths and 'being' through contrasting Entropy > Calculus (EC) as the actual l

Numbers, Machine and Father Ted

2006-10-18 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi, I have come back from Bergen (it was very nice) and I have read the last posts and I will make some comments in order. Peter D. Jones said some time ago, after I said that I will identify "(digital) machines" with number; he said: "You can't". Of course I can. This is a key point, and i

Re: Numbers, Machine and Father Ted

2006-10-18 Thread 1Z
Bruno Marchal wrote: > Hi, > > I have come back from Bergen (it was very nice) and I have read the > last posts and I will make some comments in order. > > Peter D. Jones said some time ago, after I said that I will identify > "(digital) machines" with number; he said: > > "You can't". > > Of co

Re: Numbers, Machine and Father Ted

2006-10-18 Thread David Nyman
Bruno Marchal wrote: > If you prefer I should > have said "associate" instead of "identifying". Hi Bruno, welcome back. The terminological distinction you now make above is important - maybe it's another case of Franco-English faux amis (false cognates), but when you say 'identify' I think it s

Re: To observe is to......

2006-10-18 Thread Colin Geoffrey Hales
> [Scene: Night-time. Fathers Ted and Dougal are in bed. > > Ted: "Dougal, that's a great idea! Can you tell me more?" > Dougal: "Whoa, Ted - I want out! I can't take the pressure."] > > ..However, purely on the understanding that I'm a mere COMP > kibbitzer, and of course - >> This is to be F

Re: Numbers, Machine and Father Ted

2006-10-18 Thread 1Z
David Nyman wrote: > Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > If you prefer I should > > have said "associate" instead of "identifying". > > Hi Bruno, welcome back. > > The terminological distinction you now make above is important - maybe > it's another case of Franco-English faux amis (false cognates), but >

Re: Numbers, Machine and Father Ted

2006-10-18 Thread David Nyman
1Z wrote: > This *is* ecumenicism. The buck stops here. What higher > court of appeal is there , than consideration of the nature of > EVERYTHING? Touché! > If Bruno isn't reifying numbers, he's in trouble. And if the materialist isn't reifying the observables, he's right in there with him. Ta