Re: The Unreality of Time

Evgenii : I thank you for your questions, since It helps me to re-examine and clarify my position. 2012/7/29 Evgenii Rudnyi > On 29.07.2012 11:28 Alberto G. Corona said the following: > > These psycho-philosophical arguments like the one of John Ellis are >> what in evolutionary Psychology is c

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

Le 28-juil.-12, à 18:46, John Clark a écrit : On Sat, Jul 28, 2012  Bruno Marchal wrote: > You goal does not seem in discussing ideas, but in mocking people. That is not true, my goal has two parts: 1) Figuring out what you mean by "free will". Free-will is an informal term use in many

Re: On the assumption of the Plurality of Numbers

Le 28-juil.-12, à 20:37, Stephen P. King a écrit : On 7/28/2012 9:35 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: This is a "degeneracy" problem, everything looks, acts and even is one and the same thing, so how is there any differentiation that allows a plurality to obtain? 0 ≠ s(0) ≠ s(s(0)) ≠   

Re: Remarks on an idea on First-Order Logical Duality

Le 29-juil.-12, à 07:34, Stephen P. King a écrit : Dear Bruno, From http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/awodey/preprints/fold.pdf First-Order Logical Duality we read: "In the propositional case, one passes from a propositional theory to a Boolean algebra by constructing the Lindenbaum-Tarsk

Re: Remarks on an idea on First-Order Logical Duality

"Computations are not proof. There are similarities, and there are a lot of interesting relationships between the two concepts, but we cannot use proof theory for computation theory" What goes to Another intriging duality : The Curry-Howard isomorphism between computer programs and mathematical pr

Re: Contra Step 8 of UDA

On 30 July 2012 13:11, Bruno Marchal wrote: If we are removing ourselves from the object of our study we must remove >> all things that are implied. It is the observer that acts, not the object >> alone. All of the properties, such as reflexivity, transitivity, symmetry, >> do freeze and cease

Re: Remarks on an idea on First-Order Logical Duality

On 7/30/2012 9:34 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: "Computations are not proof. There are similarities, and there are a lot of interesting relationships between the two concepts, but we cannot use proof theory for computation theory" What goes to Another intriging duality : The Curry-Howard isomor

Re: Contra Step 8 of UDA

On 7/30/2012 10:20 AM, David Nyman wrote: On 30 July 2012 13:11, Bruno Marchal > wrote: If we are removing ourselves from the object of our study we must remove all things that are implied. It is the observer that acts, not the object alone. Al

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 Bruno Marchal wrote: > > religious people defined it [free will] often by the ability to choose > consciously And those very same religious people define consciousness as the ability to have free will, and around and around we go. > and people from the law can invoke it

A online book that might help

Dear Bruno, You might find this online available book " An Outline of Ergodic Theory by Steven Arthur Kalikow " math.unc.edu/Faculty/petersen/erg3.docto possible address the measure problem. -- Onward! Stephen "Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed." ~ Francis Bacon -- You received

Re: The Unreality of Time

On 7/30/2012 2:19 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: The Boltzman brains , according with what i have read, are completely different beasts. Boltzman pressuposes, that , since no random arrangement of matter is statistically impossible, and Boltzman demonstrated it in certain conditions (ergodic condi

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

On 7/30/2012 4:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Le 28-juil.-12, à 18:46, John Clark a écrit : On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 Bruno Marchal wrote: > You goal does not seem in discussing ideas, but in mocking people. That is not true, my goal has two parts: 1) Figuring out what you mean by "free will".

Re: The Unreality of Time

On 30.07.2012 11:19 Alberto G. Corona said the following: Evgenii : I thank you for your questions, since It helps me to re-examine and clarify my position. 2012/7/29 Evgenii Rudnyi On 29.07.2012 11:28 Alberto G. Corona said the following: These psycho-philosophical arguments like the one of

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

On 7/30/2012 10:42 AM, John Clark wrote: > The "Free" prefix is just an emphasis, and I don't take it too much seriously. You say that but I don't believe it and I don't think even you really believe it, otherwise you'd just say "will" means you want to do some things and don't want to

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 11:08:29AM -0700, meekerdb wrote: > On 7/30/2012 4:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >Free-will is an informal term use in many informal setting. > >religious people defined it often by the ability to choose > >consciously between doing bad things or not, and people from the > >

Re: Stephen Hawking: Philosophy is Dead

On 7/30/2012 4:05 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 11:08:29AM -0700, meekerdb wrote: On 7/30/2012 4:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Free-will is an informal term use in many informal setting. religious people defined it often by the ability to choose consciously between doing bad