Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On 27 Sep 2013, at 20:10, David Nyman wrote: On 27 September 2013 17:00, Bruno Marchal wrote: The NDAA bill is equivalent with "If you fear me, I will put you indefinitely in jail". I confess that I hadn't been giving this issue much attention. However, I now read the following: "Section

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On 27 Sep 2013, at 19:55, John Clark wrote: On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 Russell Standish wrote: > I do remember a conversation you had with Bruno about 5 years ago when you were discussing what a man in Helsinki would experience when undergoing the duplicator experiment. Yes. > I seem to re

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On 27 Sep 2013, at 21:54, John Clark wrote: On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 11:37 PM, LizR wrote: > Anyone who has a problem with Bruno's teleportation thought experiment should logically have the same problem with the MWI. No, you are entirely incorrect. The Many World's Interpretation is abo

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On 28 Sep 2013, at 06:27, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > Teleportation thought experiments are also about what you can expect to see. And I have no objection to thought experiments of that sort, but Bruno is not talking about assigning

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On 28 Sep 2013, at 06:33, chris peck wrote: Hi Russel Thank goodness Clarcky has the same/similar complaint as me. I think Brent does too, because he said he had an initial reaction to the step like this and then offered an analysis of the probabilities to me all of which were certaintie

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On 28 Sep 2013, at 07:46, Russell Standish wrote: On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 04:33:15AM +, chris peck wrote: Hi Russel Thank goodness Clarcky has the same/similar complaint as me. I think Brent does too, because he said he had an initial reaction to the step like this and then offered an

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 09:29:17AM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 28 Sep 2013, at 07:46, Russell Standish wrote: > > >On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 04:33:15AM +, chris peck wrote: > >>Hi Russel > >> > >>Thank goodness Clarcky has the same/similar complaint as me. I > >>think Brent does too, bec

Re: The confluence of cosmology and biology

So not an ongoing computation performed by the universe, as suggested by, say, Max Tegmark? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+un

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On 28 Sep 2013, at 06:02, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> I said that if Russell Standish were duplicated then Russell Standish would be in Moscow and Washington. > This is only true from the POV of an external observer which is not Russell

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On 23 September 2013 13:16, Russell Standish wrote: > On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 12:29:30PM -0400, John Clark wrote: > > > > Bruno, if you have something new to say about this "proof" of yours then > > say it, but don't pretend that 2 years of correspondence and hundreds of > > posts in which I list

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On 28 Sep 2013, at 10:17, LizR wrote: On 23 September 2013 13:16, Russell Standish wrote: On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 12:29:30PM -0400, John Clark wrote: > > Bruno, if you have something new to say about this "proof" of yours then > say it, but don't pretend that 2 years of correspondence and

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On 26 September 2013 17:27, chris peck wrote: > Hi Liz > > Interesting. There's another thought experiment, or gambit, MWIers raise > involving quantum immortality. > > In this, some quantum event at time t triggers a gun to shoot (or not > shoot) the MWIer. > > Traditionally, MWIers argue the on

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On 28 Sep 2013, at 09:44, Russell Standish wrote: On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 09:29:17AM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Sep 2013, at 07:46, Russell Standish wrote: On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 04:33:15AM +, chris peck wrote: Hi Russel Thank goodness Clarcky has the same/similar complaint as

Re: The confluence of cosmology and biology

On 28 Sep 2013, at 08:29, freqflyer07281972 wrote: So it seems to me that all of us are situated within a spectacular confluence of cosmological and biological factors. The cosmological factors include the fact that dark energy hasn't gotten strong enough to rip the whole works apart, that

Re: The confluence of cosmology and biology

On 28 Sep 2013, at 09:44, LizR wrote: So not an ongoing computation performed by the universe, What does that mean? as suggested by, say, Max Tegmark? Can you give a reference? Thanks, Bruno -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everyt

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On 28 September 2013 14:27, John Clark wrote: > On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > >> > Teleportation thought experiments are also about what you can expect to >> > see. > > > And I have no objection to thought experiments of that sort, but Bruno is > not talking abo

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 3:16 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > Everett mention what you call "feeling of identity", which is a > consequence of modeling the observer by a machine > It doesn't matter if "modeling the observer by a machine" is valid or not, if tomorrow somebody remembers being Bruno

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On 9/28/2013 12:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ... Prohibition is only a technic to sell a lot of drugs, without quality control, nor price control, + the ability to directly target all kids on all streets, making huge black markets, and leading to important corruption so that prohibition is conti

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On 9/28/2013 12:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 27 Sep 2013, at 19:55, John Clark wrote: On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 Russell Standish > wrote: > I do remember a conversation you had with Bruno about 5 years ago when you were discussing what a man in Helsinki

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On 9/28/2013 7:58 AM, John Clark wrote: Does "comp" mean every event must have a cause? That question has a simple yes or no answer, and you made up the word so you must know the answer, what is it? If it's yes then I don't believe in this thing you call "comp". But the answer is "yes" in Ever

RE: What gives philosophers a bad name?

>> I agree with most of what you wrote above, but that last is nonsense. There is no way the government could have engineered the 9/11 attacks without it being leaked even before it happened. Remember Occam, you need to take the simplest explanation. Brent I agree that logically it would seem s

Re: The confluence of cosmology and biology

On 28 September 2013 21:15, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 28 Sep 2013, at 09:44, LizR wrote: > > So not an ongoing computation performed by the universe, > > What does that mean? > > Actually I think I got confused, it isn't Max T who suggested that, but didn't someone like John Conway suggest the

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On 9/28/2013 12:37 PM, Chris de Morsella wrote: >> I agree with most of what you wrote above, but that last is nonsense. There is no way the government could have engineered the 9/11 attacks without it being leaked even before it happened. Remember Occam, you need to take the simplest explana

RE: What gives philosophers a bad name?

>> But supposing this giant and very loosely organized group is, as a group, responsible for a bombing because some of it's explosives were used, is a very big stretch. It's much simpler and more likely that a rouge element in one small group, maybe even one man, stole the explosive for use in the

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On 9/28/2013 4:28 PM, Chris de Morsella wrote: >>But supposing this giant and very loosely organized group is, as a group, responsible for a bombing because some of it's explosives were used, is a very big stretch. It's much simpler and more likely that a rouge element in one small group, may

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

On 23 September 2013 13:16, Russell Standish wrote: > On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 12:29:30PM -0400, John Clark wrote: > > > > Bruno, if you have something new to say about this "proof" of yours then > > say it, but don't pretend that 2 years of correspondence and hundreds of > > posts in which I list

RE: What gives philosophers a bad name?

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2013 4:45 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: What gives philosophers a bad name? On 9/28/2013 4:28 PM, Chris de Morsella wrote: >> But su

Aaronson's paper

On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 12:47:28PM +1300, LizR wrote: > On 23 September 2013 13:16, Russell Standish wrote: > > > For me, my stopping point is step 8. I do mean to summarise the > > intense discussion we had earlier this year on this topic, but that > > will require an uninterrupted period of a d

Re: The confluence of cosmology and biology

On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 08:53:48AM +1300, LizR wrote: > On 28 September 2013 21:15, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > > > On 28 Sep 2013, at 09:44, LizR wrote: > > > > So not an ongoing computation performed by the universe, > > > > What does that mean? > > > > Actually I think I got confused, it isn't

Could quantum of light be the original source of life forming atoms ?

Could quantum of light be the original source of life forming atoms ? . Lukin said. " What we have done is create a special type of medium in which photons interact with each other so strongly that they begin to act as though they have mass, and they bind together to form molecules

Re: Aaronson's paper

On 9/28/2013 7:20 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 12:47:28PM +1300, LizR wrote: On 23 September 2013 13:16, Russell Standish wrote: For me, my stopping point is step 8. I do mean to summarise the intense discussion we had earlier this year on this topic, but that will requ