Yeah and a chicken is a dog.
Le 29 oct. 2013 03:41, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com a écrit :
So matter is just maya-illusion.
That is really religion- right?
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote:
2013/10/28 Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
On 28 Oct 2013, at 19:20, spudboy...@aol.com wrote:
I read, somewhere, Professor Marchal, that it was the spindle
cells in the brain that pushed the smarter creatures on this planet
into high gear, so to speak, not so much glial, unless we are
describing the same thing, primates, whales,
On 28 Oct 2013, at 19:47, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Monday, October 28, 2013 1:38:58 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 28 Oct 2013, at 15:12, John Mikes wrote:
What do you call ANY PHYSICS? is there a God given marvel (like
any other religious miracle to believe in) callable PHYSICS?
I
On 28 Oct 2013, at 19:55, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Monday, October 28, 2013 1:53:02 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
I refer you to my rare posts where I suggest that the level is the
molecular level, and should include the glial cells, which in my
opinion (from diverse reading) handle
On 28 Oct 2013, at 20:33, Richard Ruquist wrote:
Bruno: The fact that something is enumerable does not entail that
you can derive it from PA, nor that it is a necessary part of physics.
Richard: You got it backwards. The CY Compact manifolds are the
machine that computes because they are
On 29 Oct 2013, at 03:41, Richard Ruquist wrote:
So matter is just maya-illusion.
Yes. That's the result. UDA shows that if we can survive with a
digital brain, by virtue of its infomation handling power (and not
some magic), then matter is only appearance in the mind of some
*Cells are people, perhaps. Dendrites and molecules lack self-referential
means, like quarks. *
Then cows are Nietzchian superpeople. That disqualifies half of mi fridge's
food.
2013/10/29 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
On 28 Oct 2013, at 19:55, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Monday, October
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com wrote:
Cells are people, perhaps. Dendrites and molecules lack self-referential
means, like quarks.
Then cows are Nietzchian superpeople. That disqualifies half of mi fridge's
food.
You can't just mix two unrelated
On 29 Oct 2013, at 02:13, chris peck wrote:
Hi Jason
Right but when you refer to the experience or chris peck's
experiences, that is speaking in the third person.
It should make no difference to your argument at all.
That makes the difference, because the prediction concerned the
Leibniz's platonism and the false problem of reductionism
In physics and psychology we have two enigmas if materialism rules,
those of spontaneous mental intentions (so that there is no free will) and also
that of spontaneous (probabililistic) events such as we find in statistical
mechanics
Bruno,
I do not use religion in a pejorative sense. Actually I am a Hindu.
(At least I was until I got kicked out of the Muktananda Ashram)
And so I am religiously in agreement with physical reality being an
illusion.
However, I am also a physicist and my string cosmology goes against my
Roger,
Having just learned a thing or two from Bruno,
it strikes me that Leibniz monads are Aristotelian rather than Platonic
just like my string cosmology.
Richard
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 6:40 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
Leibniz's platonism and the false problem of
2013/10/29 Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com
Bruno,
I do not use religion in a pejorative sense. Actually I am a Hindu.
(At least I was until I got kicked out of the Muktananda Ashram)
And so I am religiously in agreement with physical reality being an
illusion.
However, I am also a
I know a single concept of people
I wonder what´s the new concept of people, different from the one I manage
(either philosophical or not)
Have they rights?
2013/10/29 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 3:08:16 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 28 Oct 2013, at 19:55, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Monday, October 28, 2013 1:53:02 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
I refer you to my rare posts where I suggest that the level is the
molecular level, and should
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com wrote:
I know a single concept of people
I wonder what´s the new concept of people, different from the one I manage
(either philosophical or not)
Have they rights?
This is a very good question which, in fact, serves
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 3:05:52 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 28 Oct 2013, at 19:47, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Monday, October 28, 2013 1:38:58 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 28 Oct 2013, at 15:12, John Mikes wrote:
What do you call ANY PHYSICS? is there a God given marvel
The problem with modernity is precisely the confusion and madness (and I
may say lack of intellectual strenght) of this fluidity, ever depending on
audiences and personal interest that makes today amoebas to have rights ...
and tomorrow morning we can massacrate people because at last, they are
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 10:56:44 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 29 Oct 2013, at 14:23, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 3:05:52 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 28 Oct 2013, at 19:47, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Monday, October 28, 2013
Chris,
Perhaps it is simpler to think about first person indeterminacy like this
(it requires some familiaraity with programming, but I will try to
elaborate those details):
Imagine there is a conscious AI inside a virtual environment (an open field)
Inside that virtual environment is a ball,
I wonder if we used a photon multiplier that looked like Mickey Mouse and
then discovered that photons looked like Mickey Mouse if it would occur to
anyone that some of our assumptions might have been premature.
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 10:03:39 AM UTC-4, spudb...@aol.com wrote:
Here is a
I´m not atacking you. I simply I like to talk with people, and for this
purpose is necessary to share a clear definition of concepts.
However, Telmo, If you don´t think so, then of course I´m attacking your
position. But not for much time because even attacking with words becomes
impossible with
Glial cells may also play a critical role in memory formation:
http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/27913/title/Glial-cell
s-aid-memory-formation/
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruno Marchal
Sent: Tuesday,
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com wrote:
I´m not atacking you. I simply I like to talk with people, and for this
purpose is necessary to share a clear definition of concepts.
However, Telmo, If you don´t think so, then of course I´m attacking your
position.
What are the 8 hypostases? I've seen this referred to a few other times on
this list and have never really known what it refers to.
thanks
dan
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 10:30:26 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 29 Oct 2013, at 14:14, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Tuesday, October
If true - ESA experimental measurements of the polarization of ranges of
gamma rays (over a range of energies) from very distant gamma ray bursts
that have travelled across billions of light years of spacetime to reach
earth. Their experiments determined that spacetime does not have a granular
It is true that when big bang conditions are established in the three
highest energy accelerators (including the LHC), what is observed is a
quark-gluon plasma which is described as a perfect fluid or BEC
(Bose-Einstein Condensate).
But other astronomical observations have determined that space
On 29 Oct 2013, at 14:22, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com
wrote:
I know a single concept of people
I wonder what´s the new concept of people, different from the one I
manage
(either philosophical or not)
Have they rights?
To add to this point, the main property of spindle cells (being very long
and thereby able to connect disjoint regions) might simply be necessary in
larger brains (not necessarily more intelligent brains), but since there is
a correlation between large brains and more intelligent brains, and so we
On 29 Oct 2013, at 16:17, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 10:56:44 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 29 Oct 2013, at 14:23, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 3:05:52 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 28 Oct 2013, at 19:47, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On 29 Oct 2013, at 17:12, Chris de Morsella wrote:
If true – ESA experimental measurements of the polarization of
ranges of gamma rays (over a range of energies) from very distant
gamma ray bursts that have travelled across billions of light years
of spacetime to reach earth. Their
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote:
If John Clark was lying and Bruno has not changed his mind and you is
still the guy(s) who will remember having been in Helsinki then it is
beyond dispute that YOU will see BOTH Moscow AND Helsinki.
It is correct
2013/10/29 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote:
If John Clark was lying and Bruno has not changed his mind and you
is still the guy(s) who will remember having been in Helsinki then it is
beyond dispute that YOU will
2013/10/29 Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com
2013/10/29 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote:
If John Clark was lying and Bruno has not changed his mind and you
is still the guy(s) who will remember having been in
On 29 Oct 2013, at 17:07, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
What are the 8 hypostases? I've seen this referred to a few other
times on this list and have never really known what it refers to.
It is eight intensional variants of Gödel's arithmetical predicate,
that all self-referentially correct
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 1:01:25 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 29 Oct 2013, at 16:17, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 10:56:44 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 29 Oct 2013, at 14:23, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013
On 10/29/2013 8:19 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
Chris,
Perhaps it is simpler to think about first person indeterminacy like this (it requires
some familiaraity with programming, but I will try to elaborate those details):
Imagine there is a conscious AI inside a virtual environment (an open field)
On 10/29/2013 10:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 29 Oct 2013, at 17:12, Chris de Morsella wrote:
If true – ESA experimental measurements of the polarization of ranges of gamma rays
(over a range of energies) from very distant gamma ray bursts that have travelled
across billions of light years
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 2:06 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 10/29/2013 8:19 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
Chris,
Perhaps it is simpler to think about first person indeterminacy like
this (it requires some familiaraity with programming, but I will try to
elaborate those details):
I suggested doing this on FOAR (I used HAL from 2001). It simply makes it
easier to visualise if you forget about biological creatures. Assuming
comp, an AI is exactly equivalent to a human person, so anything you can do
to an AI could be done (in theory) to a human by a teleporter, or to a
human
Doesn't look too promising so far. Where are all the tripods and canals?
http://mashable.com/2013/10/29/mars-flyover-video/
--
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
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 2:11:56 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 29 Oct 2013, at 17:07, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
What are the 8 hypostases? I've seen this referred to a few other times on
this list and have never really known what it refers to.
It is eight intensional variants of
Reductionism is the view that all mental processes can be reduced or
explained by brain mechanisms.
I thought it was the view that phenomena can be explained by simpler
phenomena (until such time as you hit bottom) ?
On 30 October 2013 00:09, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Roger,
On 30 October 2013 07:15, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
Matter is concrete sense that extends to the inertial frame of the body.
Get rid of your body, and your dream is matter.
Goo goo goo joob!
Sorry, but that does sound like a surreal 60s lyric, though it could maybe
do with
On 30 October 2013 07:53, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 10/29/2013 9:27 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Depressingly, until the
middle of the XX century there was no general consensus that all human
beings are people with equal rights.
That's a very recent idea, indeed.
It's so
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 5:27 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 29 Oct 2013, at 14:22, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com
wrote:
I know a single concept of people
I wonder what´s the new concept of people, different
On 30 October 2013 13:24, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 6:52:12 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote:
On 30 October 2013 07:15, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com wrote:
Matter is concrete sense that extends to the inertial frame of the body.
Get rid of your
That article is very interesting and show how little we know and worst of
all, how little we realize how little we know, by the way.
2013/10/28 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com
http://medicalxpress.com/news/2013-10-neuroscientists-mini-neural-brain.html
Dendrites, the branch-like
On 30 October 2013 00:37, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
Physics is what happens in the natural world due to natural processes.
That sentence should win some kind of prize for containing the most
logical
fallacies.
I suppose you could say causes outside of the physical
On 10/29/2013 4:02 PM, LizR wrote:
On 30 October 2013 07:53, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 10/29/2013 9:27 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Depressingly, until the
middle of the XX century there was no general consensus that all human
beings are
On 30 October 2013 14:22, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 10/29/2013 4:02 PM, LizR wrote:
On 30 October 2013 07:53, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 10/29/2013 9:27 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Depressingly, until the
middle of the XX century there was no general consensus
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 8:40:52 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote:
On 30 October 2013 13:24, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com javascript:
wrote:
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 6:52:12 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote:
On 30 October 2013 07:15, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com wrote:
Matter is concrete
On 30 October 2013 14:26, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 8:40:52 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote:
On 30 October 2013 13:24, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 6:52:12 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote:
On 30 October 2013 07:15, Craig
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 9:08:53 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote:
On 30 October 2013 00:37, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com javascript:
wrote:
Physics is what happens in the natural world due to natural
processes.
That sentence should win some kind of prize for containing
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 9:29:21 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote:
On 30 October 2013 14:26, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com javascript:
wrote:
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 8:40:52 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote:
On 30 October 2013 13:24, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, October
On 10/29/2013 4:17 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
But this is how I see the concept of Übermensch. The idea got horribly
distorted by subsequent political events. The ideal of Übermensch is a
human that transcends the illusion and becomes aware of it's true (1p)
nature. I also see it as close to
On 10/29/2013 5:40 PM, LizR wrote:
On 30 October 2013 13:24, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com
mailto:whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 6:52:12 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote:
On 30 October 2013 07:15, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com wrote:
Bruno, Craig and Learned discussion partners:
it is hard even to read-in into the endless back-and-forth you exude. At
least for me - pretending that I still retain may subjectivity (don't
misunderstand: I deny anything 'objective' if not adjusted by our own sub).
We are not capable of even
Hi Jason (again)
in your response to Brent:
Personally I believe no theory that aims to attach persons to one
psychological or physiological continuity can be successful.
ok, but in Bruno's step 3 it is taken as axiomatic that you survive in both
branches because there is a continuity of
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Telmo Menezes
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 2:32 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Chris de
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 9:57:29 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote:
On 10/29/2013 5:40 PM, LizR wrote:
On 30 October 2013 13:24, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 6:52:12 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote:
On 30 October 2013 07:15, Craig Weinberg
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 10:17:40 PM UTC-4, JohnM wrote:
Bruno, Craig and Learned discussion partners:
it is hard even to read-in into the endless back-and-forth you exude. At
least for me - pretending that I still retain may subjectivity (don't
misunderstand: I deny anything
A Quora answer to the following question. Nothing new for me here
probably, but It's maybe organized in a more concise way.
Philosophy: If human beings are nothing more than matter, why are you
conscious as
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 3:12 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
I suggested doing this on FOAR (I used HAL from 2001). It simply makes it
easier to visualise if you forget about biological creatures. Assuming
comp, an AI is exactly equivalent to a human person, so anything you can do
to an AI
64 matches
Mail list logo
