On 18 Mar 2011, at 21:09, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
on 17.03.2011 16:38 Bruno Marchal said the following:
On 17 Mar 2011, at 15:33, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
on 16.03.2011 17:14 Bruno Marchal said the following:
On 15 Mar 2011, at 22:59, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
I do not follow the relationship be
On 18 Mar 2011, at 19:34, meekerdb wrote:
On 3/18/2011 8:12 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Hi John,
In computer science there is something interesting which can be
seen as a critics or as a vindication of what you are saying. That
thing is the Church thesis, also called Church-Turing thesis, (
on 19.03.2011 08:32 Bruno Marchal said the following:
On 18 Mar 2011, at 21:09, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
Not at all. I said exactly that. See the quote above. It is *because*
they have the same right, that we have to listen to both copies, and
can define the indeterminacy from what they ca
Bruno and Brent:
"machines" either 'real' numbers' or not, they are humanly devised, even if
we state not to be able to 'understand' them. I want to venture into domains
where our 'human ways cannot apply e.g. (silly even to attempt to give an
examples on whatever we are not capable to knowing) if
On 19 Mar 2011, at 18:04, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
on 19.03.2011 08:32 Bruno Marchal said the following:
On 18 Mar 2011, at 21:09, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
Not at all. I said exactly that. See the quote above. It is
*because*
they have the same right, that we have to listen to both copies
on 19.03.2011 20:16 Bruno Marchal said the following:
On 19 Mar 2011, at 18:04, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
At this point I am not sure that I agree with oneness of the mind.
I have no certainty about this, *even* in the comp frame. The only
quasi-certainty is that physics is a projection o
6 matches
Mail list logo
