Re: The Nature of Truth

On 30 Dec 2013, at 20:02, Alberto G. Corona wrote: To summarize, there is no possible pure knowledge, Why? On the contrary, beliefs can intersect truth, sometimes, and provably so for simpler machine than us. What happens is that only God knows when your beliefs are genuine knowledge. For

Re: The Nature of Truth

On 30 Dec 2013, at 23:32, John Mikes wrote: Dear Edgar: allow me not to copy your post the 8th time, just marking the #s of your par-s into my short remarks. #1 As long as we don't "know" ALL of the (external?) complexity-stuff we cannot claim 'knowledge' of any 'reality', An (ideal, so

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 30 Dec 2013, at 20:00, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 3:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: But that's essentially everything, since everything is (presumably) quantum. But notice the limitation of quantum computers, if it has N qubits it takes 2^N complex numbers to specify its state, BUT you

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 30 Dec 2013, at 21:49, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:09 PM, meekerdb wrote: > If an influence can go backward in time as well as forward then it can effectively have FTL influence, We already know for a fact that faster than light influences exist, and this has nothin

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 30 Dec 2013, at 22:00, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> That means you think things are realistic, and that means I know for a fact your thinking is wrong, not crazy but wrong. We know from experiment that Bell's inequality is violated, and th

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 30 Dec 2013, at 23:32, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 2:20 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:45 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 1:29 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 3:57 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 12:04 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon,

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On 30 Dec 2013, at 19:33, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 1:41 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Dec 2013, at 02:59, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 4:41 PM, LizR wrote: On 30 December 2013 09:35, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Liz, Good questions. The computations take place in P-time which is the uni

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 30 Dec 2013, at 19:44, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 2:07 AM, LizR wrote: On 30 December 2013 21:02, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Dear Bruno, Why do you not consider an isomorphism between the Category of computer/universal-numbers and physical realities? That way we can avoid a lot of

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 12:28:50PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: > Thanks (for Edgar). The guy deriving space from time is Allen > Francom. You might google on "FOAR time space Allen Francom", > perhaps. I guess he discusses this on other lists too. He wrote > papers on that subject. > I'm not awa

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 30 Dec 2013, at 20:05, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 3:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Dec 2013, at 09:04, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 11:58 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Dec 2013, at 20:35, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 6:10 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Liz, No, it is clear that

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 30 Dec 2013, at 21:43, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear LizR and Brent, I will try to go at this from a different direction. What exactly does "fundamental level" mean? Does there have to be "something fundamental"? Fundamental is often used in two senses. either as "very important".

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On 30 Dec 2013, at 22:30, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear LizR, On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:23 PM, LizR wrote: On 31 December 2013 07:40, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 1:56 AM, LizR wrote: On 30 December 2013 20:53, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Hi LizR, Round and round we go... This sentence "

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On 30 Dec 2013, at 22:33, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 1:23 PM, LizR wrote: On 31 December 2013 07:40, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 1:56 AM, LizR wrote: On 30 December 2013 20:53, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Hi LizR, Round and round we go... This sentence "It emerges because instants ar

Re: The background to Edgar's book

The reason I asked the original question in this thread is to get some idea of the background to Edgar's work, in particular, I was interest to know if there is any logical or mathematical underpinning to it, if it is a development of ideas that have been previously published, and so on. Getting a

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On 30 Dec 2013, at 23:32, Stephen Paul King wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 5:19 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 2:08 PM, LizR wrote: On 31 December 2013 10:33, meekerdb wrote: But then the explanation for *this* is that it's just a random one we happen to exist in. I don't see th

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 31 Dec 2013, at 02:13, Pierz wrote: On Tuesday, December 31, 2013 7:40:02 AM UTC+11, Liz R wrote: On 31 December 2013 00:00, Pierz wrote: I have to admit I'm starting to derive a weird kind of enjoyment from this debate. Liz and frequentflyer: you guys are my heroes. Though "anodyne"

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 31 Dec 2013, at 03:09, LizR wrote: On 31 December 2013 07:44, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 2:07 AM, LizR wrote: On 30 December 2013 21:02, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Dear Bruno, Why do you not consider an isomorphism between the Category of computer/universal-numbers and physical rea

Re: The background to Edgar's book

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 11:19 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Liz, > > You claim my theory of time is Newtonian but that just demonstrates your > complete lack of understanding of the theory... > > Well, this one is at least a few hundred years old: "You disagree only because it is obvious that you do

Re: The background to Edgar's book

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 11:53 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > Hi John, > > > as a former ed-in-chief of a science magazine (Ion Exchange and > Membranes) I > > know the difficulties one can run into if trying to get peer-review > approval > > on "NEW" ideas that do not fit into the conventional scienti

Re: The background to Edgar's book

Hi Liz, The Two kinds of time theory is original with me dating back to 2007. I've presented it in quite a clear logical framework from a couple different perspectives in my posts to this group. The logic is quite clear and quite convincing, but only when the underlying concept is clearly und

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Jason, Thanks for asking. I'll start a new topic on Consciousness hopefully sometime today as it is clearly an important topic on its own. Edgar On Tuesday, December 31, 2013 12:13:26 AM UTC-5, Jason wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 2:17 AM, Jason Resch > > wrote: > >> >> >> Do

A Theory of Consciousness

All, I'll present a brief overview of my theory of consciousness from my book on Reality here. If anyone is interested I can elaborate. To understand consciousness we first must clearly distinguish between consciousness ITSELF and the contents of consciousness that become conscious by appearin

Re: The background to Edgar's book

On Dec 31, 2013, at 8:22 AM, "Edgar L. Owen" wrote: Hi Liz, The Two kinds of time theory is original with me dating back to 2007. I've presented it in quite a clear logical framework from a couple different perspectives in my posts to this group. The logic is quite clear and quite convi

Re: A Theory of Consciousness

Interesting! Samiya On 31-Dec-2013, at 8:09 PM, "Edgar L. Owen" wrote: > All, > > I'll present a brief overview of my theory of consciousness from my book on > Reality here. If anyone is interested I can elaborate. > > To understand consciousness we first must clearly distinguish between >

A paranormal prediction for the next year

One year ago I sent the following post to the list, I did not change one word. One year from now I intend to send this same message yet again. I have been a member of the Extropian List for many years and at the beginning of the year it is my habit to send a message to that list ab

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On Dec 31, 2013, at 8:28 AM, "Edgar L. Owen" wrote: Jason, Thanks for asking. I'll start a new topic on Consciousness hopefully sometime today as it is clearly an important topic on its own. Edgar On Tuesday, December 31, 2013 12:13:26 AM UTC-5, Jason wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 201

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

Not at all! On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 12:11 AM, LizR wrote: > ...or am I??? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/everything-list/1NWmK1I

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 30 Dec 2013, at 19:44, meekerdb wrote: > > On 12/30/2013 2:07 AM, LizR wrote: > > On 30 December 2013 21:02, Stephen Paul King > wrote: > >> Dear Bruno, >> >>Why do you not consider an isomorphism between the Category of >> com

Re: The background to Edgar's book

Jason, As I've explained on a number of occasions SR has nothing to say about why clock times are different in a SHARED same actual present moment in which the twins coexist for the rest of their lives after they meet up again. SR (actually GR for the twins since their clocks read different due

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Jason, Not quite. The CONTENTS of conscious are the results of computations. The FACT of consciousness itself, that the computations are conscious, is due to the self-manifesting nature of reality as explained in the other post. The rest of your questions don't follow. The fact that reality is

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Dear Edgar, I am curious. Have you every read A. Wheeler's It from Bit? Did you understand the concept of the Surprise 20 Questions game? On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jason, > > Not quite. The CONTENTS of conscious are the results of computations. The > FACT of co

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Stephen, No, haven't read it... If you think it's relevant you could summarize why... Edgar On Tuesday, December 31, 2013 11:57:46 AM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > Dear Edgar, > > I am curious. Have you every read A. Wheeler's It from Bit? Did you > understand the concept of the Surpr

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > There are at least two possible answers to the bell inequalities: > 1. Nonlocal influences > There are not "at least two" there are exactly two, but yes, things might not be local. >2. Mutliple outcomes for each measurement > Yes, things m

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > There is no faster than light influences in QM. You need to have an > explicit physical collapse to have that. In the MW, the non locality is > only apparent. > So it's all only apparent. I hate it when people say X is a illusion without ev

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 1:44 PM, meekerdb wrote: > But "Everything happens" is just as useless as "God did it". > Not quite, it might not explain much but at least the "Everything happens" theory doesn't make the problem worse. The "everything happens because God made things that way" theory is

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Hi Edgar, Wheeler shows how it is possible to obtain an emergent world from interactions between observers. It seems that I might have the exactly title of the paper wrong! Please read this! You will see the relevance immediately! http://jawarchive.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/informationquantu

Re: The background to Edgar's book

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jason, > > As I've explained on a number of occasions SR has nothing to say about why > clock times are different in a SHARED same actual present moment in which > the twins coexist for the rest of their lives after they meet up again. > I

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 12:12 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > There are at least two possible answers to the bell inequalities: >> 1. Nonlocal influences >> > > There are not "at least two" there are exactly two, but yes, things might > not be l

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jason, > > Not quite. The CONTENTS of conscious are the results of computations. The > FACT of consciousness itself, that the computations are conscious, is due > to the self-manifesting nature of reality as explained in the other post. > >

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 6:57 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > To start consider two observers standing next to each other. Do they > share the same common present moment? > Standing? Well then the answer is no, not if one observer is ta

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 31 Dec 2013, at 17:37, Stephen Paul King wrote: On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Dec 2013, at 19:44, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 2:07 AM, LizR wrote: On 30 December 2013 21:02, Stephen Paul King > wrote: Dear Bruno, Why do you not consider an isomor

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Jason, Because it's not the computations themselves, but the fact they occur in the Present Time locus of reality that makes them real that is relevant... Edgar On Tuesday, December 31, 2013 1:01:43 PM UTC-5, Jason wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Edgar L. Owen > > wrote: >

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 31 Dec 2013, at 18:24, John Clark wrote: On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > There is no faster than light influences in QM. You need to have an explicit physical collapse to have that. In the MW, the non locality is only apparent. So it's all only apparent. I h

Re: The background to Edgar's book

Jason, Correct on your last point. Without the twins being in the exact same actual present moment there would be no way for them to shake hands and compare watches, specifically their watches that show different clock times. Their Present time is simultaneous but their clock times aren't. The

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On 31 Dec 2013, at 17:44, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason, Not quite. The CONTENTS of conscious are the results of computations. This is ambiguous, and I am not sure you are using the standard sense of "computations". The FACT of consciousness itself, that the computations are conscious,

Re: A paranormal prediction for the next year

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 5:01 PM, John Clark wrote: > One year ago I sent the following post to the list, I did not change one > word. One year from now I intend to send this same message yet again. > > I have been a member of the Extropian List for many years and at the > beginni

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Dear Edgar, You are making a claim without support. Can you explain a mechanism that generates the occurrence of the content of the computations. Bruno and Wheeler do. I am much more Happy with Wheeler's explanation involving interactions, but he does not explain observers. Bruno does give us a

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Dear Bruno, Is a 3p view necessarily an ontological primitive? If we follow Wheeler's reasoning there is no such thing! On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 31 Dec 2013, at 17:44, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > Jason, >> >> Not quite. The CONTENTS of conscious are the resu

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Dear Bruno, I really do appreciate the details! On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 5:04 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 30 Dec 2013, at 19:33, meekerdb wrote: > > On 12/30/2013 1:41 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 30 Dec 2013, at 02:59, meekerdb wrote: > > On 12/29/2013 4:41 PM, LizR wrote: > > On

Re: The Nature of Truth

On 12/31/2013 1:07 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: only rules to extract knowledge from assumed beliefs. ? I answered "no" to your question. Knowledge is not extracted in any way from belief (assumed or not). knowledge *is* belief, when or in the world those beliefs are true, but this you can never

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/31/2013 1:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Dec 2013, at 20:00, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 3:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: But that's essentially everything, since everything is (presumably) quantum. But notice the limitation of quantum computers, if it has N qubits it takes 2^N compl

Re: The background to Edgar's book

Dear Liz: you wrote in your PS: "epitheton" is itself an "ornamental epitheton", I'd say. I do hope it wasn't just a typo!" I looked up epitheton and found (German) vocabulary meanings without any hint to an ornamental nature. In a Google English translational part it appeared as "EPITHET" with th

Re: The background to Edgar's book

On 1 January 2014 02:55, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 11:53 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > >> Hi John, >> >> > as a former ed-in-chief of a science magazine (Ion Exchange and >> Membranes) I >> > know the difficulties one can run into if trying to get peer-review >> approva

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/31/2013 1:51 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: A entire parallel universe as big as our own that you can never go to or even see is about as far from being local as you can get. Differentiation/splitting of "universes" is a local phenomenon. It is not instantaneous at all. In an EPR experiment

Re: The background to Edgar's book

On 1 January 2014 03:22, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Hi Liz, > > The Two kinds of time theory is original with me dating back to 2007. > > I've presented it in quite a clear logical framework from a couple > different perspectives in my posts to this group. The logic is quite clear > and quite convinc

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/31/2013 1:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Dec 2013, at 23:32, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 2:20 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:45 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/30/2013 1:29 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 3:

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jason, > > Because it's not the computations themselves, but the fact they occur in > the Present Time locus of reality that makes them real that is relevant... > > So your answer is that they can't be real computations unless they occur in

Re: A paranormal prediction for the next year

AH, but last year there was one less heading on your message! Have happy (and pedantic) new year :-) On 1 January 2014 05:01, John Clark wrote: > One year ago I sent the following post to the list, I did not change one > word. One year from now I intend to send this same message yet again. > =

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

My 15 year old son asked me "Why do people believe in God?" Once I'd sung a couple of verses of "The Second Sitting for the Last Supper" by 10cc (as you do) I started to explain the various angles on this - avoiding cognitive dissonance, being sure that you're right in the face of all the evidence

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> I sorta like the MWI but apparently you are not a fan because if what >> you say is true then the MWI is dead wrong. >> > > > Explain why the following table shows that MWI is local, and realistic > on the wave function and universal wave fu

Re: A Theory of Consciousness

On 1 January 2014 04:09, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > All, > > I'll present a brief overview of my theory of consciousness from my book > on Reality here. If anyone is interested I can elaborate. > > To understand consciousness we first must clearly distinguish between > consciousness ITSELF and the co

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 12/31/2013 2:22 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Dec 2013, at 21:43, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear LizR and Brent, I will try to go at this from a different direction. What exactly does "fundamental level" mean? Does there have to be "something fundamental"? Fundamental is often used i

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On 12/31/2013 2:41 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: To be sure, the material hypostases are not transitive, so when we observe, we don't observe that we observe, but when we feel or know, it is the case that we feel feeling and we know that we know (although not as such). Here I use comp + Theaetetus.

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 31 Dec 2013, at 03:09, LizR wrote: But I feel that you must already know this. Are you just being Devil's Advocate, or do you honestly not see the usefulness of multiverse theories? Partly playing Devil's Advocate - but doing so because I'm not convinced that Everett's MWI is the last wor

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On 1 January 2014 10:18, Jason Resch wrote: > On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > >> Jason, >> >> Because it's not the computations themselves, but the fact they occur in >> the Present Time locus of reality that makes them real that is relevant... >> >> > So your answer is t

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 1 January 2014 10:46, meekerdb wrote: > On 31 Dec 2013, at 03:09, LizR wrote: > >> >> But I feel that you must already know this. Are you just being Devil's >> Advocate, or do you honestly not see the usefulness of multiverse theories? >> > > Partly playing Devil's Advocate - but doing so beca

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

Hi Brent, It is only vicious if there is no time. For example: Math->Physics->Biology->Evolution->Humans->Culture->Science->Math' ->Physics' -> ... The knowledge evolves in time. On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 4:27 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/31/2013 2:22 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 30 D

Re: The background to Edgar's book

On 12/31/2013 5:55 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 11:53 PM, Telmo Menezes > wrote: Hi John, > as a former ed-in-chief of a science magazine (Ion Exchange and Membranes) I > know the difficulties one can run into if tryi

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 4:24 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > >> I sorta like the MWI but apparently you are not a fan because if what >>> you say is true then the MWI is dead wrong. >>> >> >> > Explain why the following table shows that MWI is loca

Re: A Theory of Consciousness

Hi Edgar, Here's a question for you. Imagine a newborn baby, but a la The Matrix, you substitute computer-generated sense information for his actual senses, using a neural jack type of interface. Does the baby grow up conscious? It seems that your answer for that would have to be no. Terren On

Re: A Theory of Consciousness

On 12/31/2013 7:09 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: All, I'll present a brief overview of my theory of consciousness from my book on Reality here. If anyone is interested I can elaborate. To understand consciousness we first must clearly distinguish between consciousness ITSELF and the contents of c

Re: The background to Edgar's book

On 12/31/2013 8:39 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: SR (actually GR for the twins since their clocks read different due to relative accelerations) explains perfectly why clock times can end up non-simultaneous Again you betray you lack of comprehension of relativity theory. The difference in proper t

Re: A Theory of Consciousness

Dear Edgar, you use words in your nicely flowing text that raise questions in my 'mind'(?) while reading them. *Consciousness "ITSELF"?* what may be your take on consciousness (not itself)? I mean: the term Ccness as used by diverse authors in diverse contexts applied to their ways of thinking. (A

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/31/2013 9:54 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 12:12 PM, John Clark > wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Jason Resch mailto:jasonre...@gmail.com>> wrote: > There are at least two possible answers to the bell inequalities:

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Liz, et al, I apologize for not responding to all posts, I'm very busy running my business and have limited time to post here. So in general I'm just responding to posts that don't ask questions I've already answered, or those that demonstrate some real comprehension or genuine interest in the

Re: A Theory of Consciousness

Dear John, Please don't consider me an opponent. I merely call them how I see them, and expect others to do likewise. I have often been wrong and accepted that fact (and I expect others to (occasionally) do the same). I only come to the conclusion slowly and reluctantly and after thorough testing (

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 1 January 2014 12:05, meekerdb wrote: > Mark A. Rubin > (Submitted on 14 Mar 2001 (v1 ), > last revised 10 May 2001 (this version, v2)) > > Bell's theorem depends crucially on counterfactual r

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

On 1 January 2014 12:09, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Liz, et al, > > I apologize for not responding to all posts, I'm very busy running my > business and have limited time to post here. So in general I'm just > responding to posts that don't ask questions I've already answered, or > those that demonst

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Another question that has been asked but not had a satisfactory response is, what testable consequences does your theory have? Or if that's too difficult, other supporting evidence could be considered (like mathematical beauty). Comp, for example, appears to predict some aspects of quantum theory,

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 12/31/2013 1:58 PM, LizR wrote: On 1 January 2014 10:46, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 31 Dec 2013, at 03:09, LizR wrote: But I feel that you must already know this. Are you just being Devil's Advocate, or do you honestly not see the usefulness of mu

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 1 January 2014 13:18, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/31/2013 1:58 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 1 January 2014 10:46, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 31 Dec 2013, at 03:09, LizR wrote: >> >>> >>> But I feel that you must already know this. Are you just being Devil's >>> Advocate, or do you honestly not see the u

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/31/2013 3:24 PM, LizR wrote: On 1 January 2014 12:05, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: Mark A. Rubin (Submitted on 14 Mar 2001 (v1 ), last revised 10 May 2001 (t

Re: A Theory of Consciousness

Liz, It's easy to demonstrate that consciousness is NOT its contents by the simple mental exercise of meditation in which the contents of consciousness are diminished to the point of vanishing. The more consciousness is emptied of individual contents, the clearer and brighter it becomes. Theref

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On 12/31/2013 4:47 PM, LizR wrote: I don't know about the SBI, unless I know it under a different name - please explain? The subjective Bayesian interpretation is what Jason dismisses as "don't ask". It's the interpretation advocated by Asher Peres (who's excellent textbook is available onli

Re: A Theory of Consciousness

On 1 January 2014 14:19, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Liz, > > It's easy to demonstrate that consciousness is NOT its contents by the > simple mental exercise of meditation in which the contents of consciousness > are diminished to the point of vanishing. The more consciousness is emptied > of individu

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

That sounds a bit like multi-solipsism - and a bit like Kant (?) indicating that we can never know the "thing in itself" only our interpretation of it. (Actually isn't that also what comp says?) On 1 January 2014 14:39, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/31/2013 4:47 PM, LizR wrote: > > I don't know abo

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 1 January 2014 13:54, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/31/2013 3:24 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 1 January 2014 12:05, meekerdb wrote: > >> Mark A. Rubin >> (Submitted on 14 Mar 2001 (v1 ), >> last revis

Re: Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality

Dear LizR, Indeed! The observation of ultra high energy gamma rays that traveled a long long way ... no dependence seen between energy and velocity... My thought was to replace the single IceCube or FishBowl of space-time with many; one per observer with a composition rule for observers that