On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 6:12 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 June 2014 15:43, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
I do know what I am criticizing, and view Marx and Engels claims in
Manifesto, and Das Kapital as nothing more than deliberate lies to
On 07 Jun 2014, at 12:14, LizR wrote:
On 7 June 2014 22:09, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 7 June 2014 19:20, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Indeed I thought too that Liz's chart confirmed what I said for the
industrial world. I remember but don't have the time to search right
On 07 Jun 2014, at 12:09, LizR wrote:
On 7 June 2014 19:20, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Indeed I thought too that Liz's chart confirmed what I said for the
industrial world. I remember but don't have the time to search right
nox that serial killing appears more in countries with
On 07 Jun 2014, at 21:43, John Ross wrote:
LizR,
You need to read my book. Its main purpose is to explain the
existence of the universe and it does exactly that.
From what assumption? I thought you did not address that question.
Also, what about consciousness? Is the brain working
On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 1:21 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 June 2014 22:30, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 6:12 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 June 2014 15:43, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
I do
On 08 Jun 2014, at 12:30, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 6:12 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 June 2014 15:43, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com
wrote:
I do know what I am criticizing, and view Marx and Engels claims in
Manifesto, and
On 7 June 2014 20:05, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
*At step 7, it is not in principle. Like in the preceding protocol, we just
assume the existence of an infinite running of the UD in our infinite
(then) space-time structure.*
*The proposition is that if that is the case, and don't see
On 07 Jun 2014, at 13:51, Richard Ruquist wrote:
No, what I think is that comp cannot be falsified because it
predicts a MWI universe and MWI cannot be falsified experimentally.
Bruno and others seem to think that the double slit experiment is
evidence for comp. But I disagree. All the
I send again this post, as it seems to not go through:
On 07 Jun 2014, at 22:18, John Ross wrote:
I do not explain consciousness.
OK. Fair enough. You are not searching to explain everything.
Unfortunately, consciousness has something to say on the very origin
of the beliefs in the
On 07 Jun 2014, at 22:18, John Ross wrote:
I do not explain consciousness.
Fair enough. You are not searching to explain everything.
Unfortunately, consciousness has something to say on the very origin
of the beliefs in the physical laws. You are still an Aristotelian
theologian
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 2:36 PM, John Ross jr...@trexenterprises.com wrote:
Neutrons have a lifetime of about 15 minutes
Yes, but only when they are independent and not attached to a proton or
other neutrons inside the nucleus of an atom.
after which they turn into an electron and a proton
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 7:26 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
They laughed at Galileo ... the laughed at Copernicus ... they laughed at
Einstein ... but they also laughed at Bozo the clown (Carl Sagan?
And for every Einstein there are 6.02*10^23 Bozo the clowns.
John K Clark
--
You
Tronnies are each a point focus of Coulomb forces. Coulomb forces spread out
from this focus point in all directions at the speed of light. The tronnies
travel in circles at speeds of (π/2)c so each tronnie is always at the focus of
its own Coulomb force waves directed along the diameter of
If there are only protons and neutrons in atomic nuclei, then you need the
magical “Strong Force”. If your neutrons are a proton and an electron then you
don’t need the strong force. I am sticking with my theory.
jr
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
I am not trying to prove quantum mechanics incorrect. I am trying to prove
my theory is correct. If my theory is correct, and quantum mechanics is
inconsistent withmy theory then quantum mechanics may very well be
incorrect. There is also a possibility that on some issues the two theories
may
Thanx, LIZ and I appreciate that you did not write down RENEWABLE
(energy).
JM
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 8:44 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 7 June 2014 08:28, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote:
Liz: not WATER WARS - there is plenty in th oceans. *Potable* is the
word.
And it is not
Thanks for the advice. I made a copy of your post.
As to conservation of mass-energy, if this rule is correct, how did our
Universe get so big?
JR
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Russell Standish
Sent:
Liz,
I try to respond to all of your points. In some cases I don’t understand your
points. What is RM? And I don’t understand primitive materialism.
I think time is absolute and the same everywhere in our Universe and it is
unrelated to space which is nothing and goes on forever.
On 08 Jun 2014, at 00:08, ghib...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, June 4, 2014 8:49:30 PM UTC+1, ghi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, June 4, 2014 8:33:28 AM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 Jun 2014, at 02:33, ghi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, June 3, 2014 5:48:10 PM UTC+1, Bruno
On 08 Jun 2014, at 05:41, LizR wrote:
Oops. I meant to say more but hit a wrong key and somehow sent that
above one-liner. And there's no way to edit your posts...oh well, to
continue...
On 8 June 2014 10:08, ghib...@gmail.com wrote:
But...the truth is no one minded too much PGC's attacks
On 9 June 2014 09:16, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 08 Jun 2014, at 05:41, LizR wrote:
Yes comp strikes me as highly controversial, which is why have been trying
to get to grips with it, to decide where I stand. But I have got stuck at
the MGA and (I think) some Kripkean
On 08 Jun 2014, at 14:28, David Nyman wrote:
On 7 June 2014 20:05, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
At step 7, it is not in principle. Like in the preceding protocol,
we just assume the existence of an infinite running of the UD in our
infinite (then) space-time structure.
The
On 9 June 2014 03:33, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 7:26 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
They laughed at Galileo ... the laughed at Copernicus ... they laughed
at Einstein ... but they also laughed at Bozo the clown (Carl Sagan?
And for every Einstein
On 9 June 2014 06:19, John Ross jr...@trexenterprises.com wrote:
Tronnies are each a point focus of Coulomb forces.
Are you saying tronnies aren't particles, but excitations of this Coulomb
field? Actually this implies that only the field exists, tronnies are just
a convenient way of
On 9 June 2014 00:30, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
The same with the MWI: we still have the ability to partially chose the
type of future we want to belong. We can influence the statistics of the
normal realities. This makes the end of the second paragraph correct with
respect to
On 9 June 2014 06:33, John Ross jr...@trexenterprises.com wrote:
I am not trying to prove quantum mechanics incorrect. I am trying to
prove my theory is correct. If my theory is correct, and quantum mechanics
is inconsistent withmy theory then quantum mechanics may very well be
incorrect.
On 9 June 2014 06:50, John Ross jr...@trexenterprises.com wrote:
Liz,
I try to respond to all of your points. In some cases I don’t understand
your points. What is RM? And I don’t understand primitive materialism.
Not understanding is the worst reason not to respond! You should ask!
On 8 June 2014 22:47, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Ready? Have you bought the Mendelson?
OK, I give in. I just found a reasonably-priced second-hand copy of the
Mendelson on Abebooks - should be here in a few days. Oh, and by the way,
I'm presently reading and enjoying Hines's Return
David Nyman gave a much more rigorous definition of primitive materialism
in another thread (he calls it primordial).
ISTM that what is supposed to be primordial about a specific set of
entities and their relations is precisely that they *exclusively* underlie
(or more correctly, comprise)
Telmo's point about ganja convictions are true, save the Vice article
did not mention American minorities being involved in the commission of
theft, robbery, carjackings, shopliftings, beatings, while having weed
on their posession. For the US police, it must be one stop shopping for
them.
On 9 June 2014 11:22, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
Back to the death penalty. Its hard for me to determine what disuades
people from murdering, if anything.
For most people you don't need to dissuade them, except in extreme
situations, imho. For
In the Is Conscious Computable? and Suicide Words God and Ideas threads
there is considerable overlap of discussion of primitive materialism. This is
the place where the Neoplatonists and the Aristotelians get to slug it out, so
to speak. I feel the quality of the discussion between David Nyman
Thank you, I have downloaded and printed it (now I just need time to read
it).
The idea of Neoplatoists and Aristotelians slugging it out is intriguing,
I'm surprised Monty Python doesn't have a sketch of this.
On 9 June 2014 13:20, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
In the “Is
I like the way every page is page one! That seems fitting somehow - not to
mention very egalitarian...
Would you or Bruno mind if I was to share this outside the everything list?
I have a couple of friends who might be interested.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 09:48:27AM +1200, LizR wrote:
On 9 June 2014 00:30, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
The same with the MWI: we still have the ability to partially chose the
type of future we want to belong. We can influence the statistics of the
normal realities. This
On 9 June 2014 13:58, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote:
I, for one, do not think it such a crazy idea.
When I was a child, I used to chant silently 3 times the outcome I
wanted before rolling a dice. Surprisingly, it seemed to work
(although I could easily have been deluded by
Go for it, Liz. The more the merrier. Sorry about the eternal page one. The
last thing on my mind was the pagination
Kim
On 9 Jun 2014, at 11:44 am, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
I like the way every page is page one! That seems fitting somehow - not to
mention very egalitarian...
On 9 Jun 2014, at 11:58 am, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote:
I don't know why I didn't discuss this idea
in my book.
Be consoled. There is a branch of the MV where you do discuss this in your book!
K
Kim Jones B.Mus.GDTL
Email:
On 9 June 2014 14:26, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
On 9 Jun 2014, at 11:58 am, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au
wrote:
I don't know why I didn't discuss this idea
in my book.
Be consoled. There is a branch of the MV where you do discuss this in your
book!
But maybe in
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:35 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you, I have downloaded and printed it (now I just need time to read
it).
The idea of Neoplatoists and Aristotelians slugging it out is intriguing,
I'm surprised Monty Python doesn't have a sketch of this.
Lol, Monty Python
Or is he (it) ?
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jun/08/super-computer-simulates-13-year-old-boy-passes-turing-test?CMP=twt_fd
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
Through the Wormhole: Is God an Alien Concept?
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1hexc7_is-god-an-alien-concept_shortfilms?start=2
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1hexc7_is-god-an-alien-concept_shortfilms?start=2
If you haven’t seen this episode, I highly recommend it.
Early on there is an
Nah, just more hype. Telling the judges that the computer was a 13 year old
who speaks English as a second language is tampering. Why not say that they
are developmentally disabled or a sociopath? No dice. At least they could
have used 13 year old judges.
On Sunday, June 8, 2014 10:34:10 PM
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 02:12:59PM +1200, LizR wrote:
On 9 June 2014 13:58, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote:
I, for one, do not think it such a crazy idea.
When I was a child, I used to chant silently 3 times the outcome I
wanted before rolling a dice. Surprisingly, it
44 matches
Mail list logo
