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

2014-01-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 04 Jan 2014, at 19:32, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason, If you don't agree with my theory of the Present moment, then what is your theory of this present moment we all experience our existence and all our actions within? Before I read Jason answer, let me tell you in three words: the

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

2014-01-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 04 Jan 2014, at 19:42, Richard Ruquist wrote: On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 04 Jan 2014, at 16:36, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Pierz, It may not be physics by your definition but both the Present moment and Consciousness are certainly part of

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

2014-01-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 04 Jan 2014, at 21:20, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 04:36, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Pierz, It may not be physics by your definition but both the Present moment and Consciousness are certainly part of reality, in fact they are basic aspects of reality. However, a theory

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

2014-01-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 04 Jan 2014, at 21:39, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 04:16, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Hi Gabe, These questions are ill formulated but I'll take a shot at them 1. For every observer there is a uniquely true (actual is a better descriptor) order of events in their own

Re: What are wavefunctions?

2014-01-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 05 Jan 2014, at 06:13, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 4:10 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: His inequality also depended on discounting retro-causation and hyper-determinism, If retro-causation exists then things are not local. and hyper-determinism If things are

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

2014-01-05 Thread Edgar L. Owen
Brent, No, that's the exact opposite of what I said. I said they ARE at the same present place when their clocks don't agree. Now a question for you. What is this present place they are in? Edgar On Saturday, January 4, 2014 10:01:02 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: On 1/4/2014 5:44 PM, Jason

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

2014-01-05 Thread Edgar L. Owen
Bruno, You say of the present moment Yes, it's not a clock time. I agree, then what is the present moment if it isn't a clock time? Edgar On Sunday, January 5, 2014 3:07:10 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 04 Jan 2014, at 19:32, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason, If you don't agree with my

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

2014-01-05 Thread Edgar L. Owen
Bruno, This is wrong on all points. I've already shown why SR requires a present moment and falsifies block time. Because the fact that everything continually travels through spacetime at the speed of light requires everything to be at one and only one point in time and that time is the

Fukushima myth

2014-01-05 Thread Telmo Menezes
http://www.snopes.com/photos/technology/fukushima.asp -- 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to

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

2014-01-05 Thread Jason Resch
On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 10:34 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 5 January 2014 17:10, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:56 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 5 January 2014 16:29, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: On Jan 4, 2014,

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

2014-01-05 Thread Edgar L. Owen
Jason, Liz, Brent, Pierz, et al, Boy it's amazing how heavily personally invested you guys are in your belief system. You respond as if someone was daring to challenge the quasi-religous core orthodoxy your very existence and self-image depends upon. As I said before, Lighten up guys, these

Re: What are wavefunctions?

2014-01-05 Thread John Clark
On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 2:57 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Several years after he found the mathematical derivation experiment showed that Bell's inequality was indeed violated. So a Wheeler theorists is free to invoke locality or non-locality as he wishes; but because MWI is a

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

2014-01-05 Thread Terren Suydam
Edgar, FWIW, from my lurker's perspective, the people on this list are giving you what you need - criticism. They are actively engaging you on your theory, which is so much better than being ignored. Better still, the quality of the criticism on this list is likely to be of the same caliber as

Re: What are wavefunctions?

2014-01-05 Thread Jason Resch
John, This may be a case of a little knowledge being dangerous. Bell's theorem holds only under a certain set of assumptions, assumptions which are not made in Everett's theory. If you won't review the materials Quentin, Bruno, and others have sent you then there is no hope for you. Jason On

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

2014-01-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Edgar, On 05 Jan 2014, at 13:41, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Bruno, You say of the present moment Yes, it's not a clock time. I agree, then what is the present moment if it isn't a clock time? It is the set of computational states on which a first person is associated as a sort of hero in

Re: What are wavefunctions?

2014-01-05 Thread John Clark
On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: Bell's theorem holds only under a certain set of assumptions, True. As I've said many times Bell made exactly 3 assumptions: 1) High School algebra and trigonometry works. 2) Things are local. 3) Things are realistic.

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

2014-01-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 05 Jan 2014, at 16:18, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason, Liz, Brent, Pierz, et al, Boy it's amazing how heavily personally invested you guys are in your belief system. You respond as if someone was daring to challenge the quasi-religous core orthodoxy your very existence and self-image

Re: What are wavefunctions?

2014-01-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 05 Jan 2014, at 18:47, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: Bell's theorem holds only under a certain set of assumptions, True. As I've said many times Bell made exactly 3 assumptions: 1) High School algebra and trigonometry works.

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

2014-01-05 Thread meekerdb
On 1/5/2014 4:33 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Brent, No, that's the exact opposite of what I said. I said they ARE at the same present place when their clocks don't agree. Yes. So why don't you recognize that present place is just a label, exactly like a latitude and longitude - and then that

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

2014-01-05 Thread meekerdb
On 1/5/2014 9:23 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Hi Edgar, On 05 Jan 2014, at 13:41, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Bruno, You say of the present moment Yes, it's not a clock time. I agree, then what is the present moment if it isn't a clock time? It is the set of computational states on which a first

Re: Fukushima myth

2014-01-05 Thread spudboy100
Now the question is, do you believe the opposite of what SNOPES has presented? Also, as global peasants, we have no influence over what the scientists look for on behalf of politicians, their bureaucrats, or the billionaires that pay them. We can have an opinion about being thrown out a window

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

2014-01-05 Thread Edgar L. Owen
Brent, No, the present moment is NOT just a label. It's an empirically verifiable observation (measurement). And not only that both twins agree on that measurement, namely that they have different clock times in the same shared present moment. There is simply no way around that Edgar

Re: Fukushima myth

2014-01-05 Thread Alberto G. Corona
Don´t try to convince hyperinformed idiots. they will consume the information that they choose to believe. For the new analphabets, consumers of the internet fantasies and myts, what formerly was called spirits are now energies. And Nuclear energy is the worst of all with the three other

Re: Fukushima myth

2014-01-05 Thread LizR
The idea would seem to be, get someone to present an exaggerated claim, show it to be false, then claim that therefore there is no problem. Happens all the time with climate change denial. On 6 January 2014 08:57, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Now the question is, do you believe the opposite of

Re: Fukushima myth

2014-01-05 Thread LizR
On 6 January 2014 09:55, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com wrote: Don´t try to convince hyperinformed idiots. they will consume the information that they choose to believe. For the new analphabets, consumers of the internet fantasies and myts, what formerly was called spirits are now

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

2014-01-05 Thread LizR
On 6 January 2014 09:00, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Brent, No, the present moment is NOT just a label. It's an empirically verifiable observation (measurement). And not only that both twins agree on that measurement, namely that they have different clock times in the same shared

Re: What are wavefunctions?

2014-01-05 Thread LizR
On 6 January 2014 06:47, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: Bell's theorem holds only under a certain set of assumptions, True. As I've said many times Bell made exactly 3 assumptions: 1) High School algebra and

Re: Fukushima myth

2014-01-05 Thread Telmo Menezes
On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 7:57 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Now the question is, do you believe the opposite of what SNOPES has presented? I don't have sufficient domain knowledge to have an opinion. The most I can hope for is to try to distinguish valid information from lies. This one was a

Re: Fukushima myth

2014-01-05 Thread Telmo Menezes
On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 8:56 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: The idea would seem to be, get someone to present an exaggerated claim, show it to be false, then claim that therefore there is no problem. Maybe you are right, but this does not invalidate the need to point out misinformation.

Re: Fukushima myth

2014-01-05 Thread LizR
No, of course not. Just pointing out that this is a common tactic used to spread misinformation. THERE IS A THREAT!!! HERE ARE THE DETAILS!!! Oh, wait. It turns out the above news was untrue. You can see the details have been faked by some panic-monger. So we're safe. There's nothing to worry

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

2014-01-05 Thread Edgar L. Owen
Liz, Yes, of course you are correct. They do it all the time but in the present moment rather than any clock time simultaneity. Without a present moment when do they meet up and compare? Certainly not in their individual clock times which are different. Edgar On Sunday, January 5, 2014

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

2014-01-05 Thread LizR
On 6 January 2014 12:45, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Liz, Yes, of course you are correct. They do it all the time but in the present moment rather than any clock time simultaneity. Without a present moment when do they meet up and compare? Certainly not in their individual clock

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

2014-01-05 Thread Jason Resch
Edgar, It might help if we all used consistent language for present, event, simultaneous, etc. I recommend we use the definitions which Einstein works out (starting on page 2 of his paper): http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/specrel.pdf It would avoid a lot of confusion I think,

The Origin of Physical Laws and Sensations

2014-01-05 Thread Gabriel Bodeen
Hi Bruno ( all), I was trying to read through your paper The Origin of Physical Laws and Sensations, which I saw linked to in a conversation earlier. I started to get lost about page 13 of the PDF, and by page 17 I was too lost to profitably continue. Can you (or anyone) suggest, based on the

Re: The Origin of Physical Laws and Sensations

2014-01-05 Thread Kim Jones
Yes. Just stay on this list and read every single post that comes through - particularly posts by Bruno himself. Maybe look at the archive of the list. The background to all of this goes back to 1994…and the conversation is still going... Cheers, Kim Jones On 6 Jan 2014, at 12:48 pm,

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

2014-01-05 Thread meekerdb
On 1/5/2014 12:00 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Brent, No, the present moment is NOT just a label. It's an empirically verifiable observation (measurement). And not only that both twins agree on that measurement, namely that they have different clock times in the same shared present moment.

Re: The Origin of Physical Laws and Sensations

2014-01-05 Thread LizR
Bruno may well be able to help when he comes online. Do you have a particular sticking point you'd like to ask about? -- 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