Re: Interesting Read

On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 11:39 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > > > On 7/21/2020 9:13 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 9:47 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < > everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On

Re: Sharpiegate

> On 7 Aug 2020, at 00:52, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List > wrote: > > 8 | DISCUSSION As hospitals around the globe have filled with patients with > COVID-19, front line providers remain without effective therapeutic tools to > directly combat the disease. The initial anecdotal reports

Re: Sharpiegate

> On 7 Aug 2020, at 00:06, spudboy100 via Everything List > wrote: > > I cannot help but agree with you on this Bruno. If we all agreed on politics, > we wouldn't (as a species) developed the A-bomb, radar, the jet plane, > missiles… Of course that is a big IF. The advantage of democracy

Re: Sharpiegate

On Friday, August 7, 2020 at 12:38:28 PM UTC+2, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 7 Aug 2020, at 00:52, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < > everyth...@googlegroups.com > wrote: > > 8 | DISCUSSION As hospitals around the globe have filled with patients > with COVID-19, front line providers remain

Re: Wolfram Model (New Foundations of Mathematics and Physics)

> On 7 Aug 2020, at 13:38, Lawrence Crowell > wrote: > > That might be, but a programming language that has no context with anything > is not that valuable. At least, we should take the semantic of the reality on which that language is based. A language per se is not enough. > At

Re: Sharpiegate

On Fri, Aug 7, 2020, 6:09 AM PGC wrote: > > > On Friday, August 7, 2020 at 12:38:28 PM UTC+2, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 7 Aug 2020, at 00:52, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < >> everyth...@googlegroups.com> wrote: >> >> 8 | DISCUSSION As hospitals around the globe have filled with

Re: Wolfram Model (New Foundations of Mathematics and Physics)

> On 6 Aug 2020, at 14:06, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > What is really going on here is that a language of hypergraphs (not well > specified) is what is assumed to be defined. All of fundamental physics is to > be rewritten in this language, replacing the others. > > >

Re: Wolfram Model (New Foundations of Mathematics and Physics)

https://www.wolframphysics.org/questions/quantum-mechanics/how-does-quantum-entanglement-occur-in-your-models/ : Q. How does quantum entanglement occur in your models? A. Two global Wolfram model states are said to be “entangled” if they share a common ancestor in the multiway evolution graph.

Re: Wolfram Model (New Foundations of Mathematics and Physics)

That might be, but a programming language that has no context with anything is not that valuable. At least it is not that valuable to me. My point is this seems to connect with concepts of spacetime as built up from large N entanglements. LC On Thursday, August 6, 2020 at 4:17:44 PM UTC-5

Re: Wolfram Model (New Foundations of Mathematics and Physics)

On Friday, August 7, 2020 at 9:43:38 AM UTC-5 Bruno Marchal wrote: > On 7 Aug 2020, at 13:38, Lawrence Crowell > wrote: > > That might be, but a programming language that has no context with > anything is not that valuable. > > > > At least, we should take the semantic of the reality on

Re: Sharpiegate

On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 6:38 AM Bruno Marchal wrote: *> the Media are wrong when mocking Trump on HCQ in some systematic way. * No they are not. Only a fool would look to an imbecile and congenital liar such as Donald J Trump for medacal advice. There will always be scientific contrarians about

Re: Sharpiegate

> On 7 Aug 2020, at 13:09, PGC wrote: > > > > On Friday, August 7, 2020 at 12:38:28 PM UTC+2, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 7 Aug 2020, at 00:52, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List >> > wrote: >> >> 8 | DISCUSSION As hospitals around the globe have filled with patients with >> COVID-19,

Re: Sharpiegate

On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 10:41 AM John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 6:38 AM Bruno Marchal wrote: > > *> the Media are wrong when mocking Trump on HCQ in some systematic way. * > > > No they are not. Only a fool would look to an imbecile and congenital liar > such as Donald J Trump for

Re: Wolfram Model (New Foundations of Mathematics and Physics)

On Friday, August 7, 2020 at 9:19:12 AM UTC-5 cloud...@gmail.com wrote: > > https://www.wolframphysics.org/questions/quantum-mechanics/how-does-quantum-entanglement-occur-in-your-models/ > : > > Q. How does quantum entanglement occur in your models? > > A. Two global Wolfram model states are

Re: Wolfram Model (New Foundations of Mathematics and Physics)

Context is all if you are doing science, for in science we study objects and events. If your interest is in doing pure mathematics or computer science that is fine, but it in of itself does not give physics. Feynman made some note of this. I found this little science fiction clip interesting

Re: Sharpiegate

On Friday, August 7, 2020 at 4:53:50 PM UTC+2, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 7 Aug 2020, at 13:09, PGC > wrote: > > > > On Friday, August 7, 2020 at 12:38:28 PM UTC+2, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 7 Aug 2020, at 00:52, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < >> everyth...@googlegroups.com>

Re: Sharpiegate

On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 2:11 PM Jason Resch wrote: >> Only a fool would look to an imbecile and congenital liar such as Donald >> J Trump for medacal advice. There will always be scientific contrarians >> about anything but I look to the latest scientific consensus for my medacal >> advice, and

Re: Sharpiegate

On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 1:33 PM John Clark wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 2:11 PM Jason Resch wrote: > > >> Only a fool would look to an imbecile and congenital liar such as >>> Donald J Trump for medacal advice. There will always be scientific >>> contrarians about anything but I look to

Re: Sharpiegate

On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 2:51 PM Jason Resch wrote: > The scientific consensus is based on scientific studies, is it not? > Yes. *> Every single study (dozens of them) that > investigated early and prophylactic use of HCQ showed a benefit, without > exception.* > A

Re: Sharpiegate

On Friday, August 7, 2020 at 2:46:49 PM UTC-5 johnk...@gmail.com wrote: > On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 2:51 PM Jason Resch wrote: > > > The scientific consensus is based on scientific studies, is it not? >> > > Yes. > > *> Every single study (dozens of them) that >>

Re: Sharpiegate

On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 2:46 PM John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 2:51 PM Jason Resch wrote: > > > The scientific consensus is based on scientific studies, is it not? >> > > Yes. > > *> Every single study (dozens of them) that >> investigated early and

Re: Sharpiegate

On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:19 PM Jason Resch wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 2:46 PM John Clark wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 2:51 PM Jason Resch wrote: >> >> > The scientific consensus is based on scientific studies, is it not? >>> >> >> Yes. >> >> *> Every single study

Re: Sharpiegate

Cite the study. Brent On 8/7/2020 7:40 AM, Jason Resch wrote: The studies that have been done show as much as an 79% reduction in death. Should we force 79% more people die while we wait for the RCTs? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything

Re: Sharpiegate

On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 10:39 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > Cite the study. > > https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202007.0025/v1 Shows 84% less hospitlization, and 80% reduced mortality. There's also this one: https://hcqtrial.com/ which