Re: Newbie Questions

2009-01-20 Thread ronaldheld
I do not see the Inflation paradigm as ad-hoc, for it explains the flatness, Horizon problem and lack of early universe relics better than any other to date. Now the Big Bang may be replaced by oscillating solutions from LQG or other theories, but AFAIK they still need an Inflation period.

Re: Newbie Questions

2009-01-21 Thread ronaldheld
I do not know that the ekpyrotic and cyclic models reprodce the observations better than the BB+inflation. Yes, no one knows what the inflation field is, but no one has observed a gluon or single quark either. I do not know what Penrose's argument is.Without the observable Universe being in

Re: The arrow of time is the easiest computational direction for life in the manifold

2009-02-04 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno Have you seen this: V. Walsh, A theory of magnitude:common cortical metrics of time, spce and quantity, trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 483 (2003) This was a one reference in a paper on time I just read today( Time and Causation http://arxiv.org/abs/0902.0559

random thoughts

2009-02-23 Thread ronaldheld
Perhaps this paper would be of interest: Deterministic multivalued logic scheme for information processing and routing in the brain(arxiv.org/abs/0902.2033)? Speaking of logic, even though I am not starting from zero,and given that it is not my full time profession, which papers/book should be

Re: random thoughts

2009-02-27 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: The fifth edition of Mendelson's book is due out in August;is it worth waiting for? I will take a look at some of the links on Podnieks page. Ronald On Feb 26, 11:17 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 23 Feb 2009, at 16:40, ronaldheld

Re: random thoughts

2009-03-02 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: Dur to financial considerations I will wait for the fifth edition to come out. On Feb 28, 6:11 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 27 Feb 2009, at 13:34, ronaldheld wrote:  The fifth edition of Mendelson's book is due out in August;is it worth waiting for? I really

Re: [Fwd: NDPR David Shoemaker, Personal Identity and Ethics: A Brief Introduction]

2009-03-02 Thread ronaldheld
Maybe the terminology does not fit here, to make a copy of my brain, wouldn't you need more than memories, but the state of the brain at one time to quantum resolution (TNG transporter term). Ronald On Feb 23, 9:04 pm, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote:

Re: [Fwd: NDPR David Shoemaker, Personal Identity and Ethics: A Brief Introduction]

2009-03-03 Thread ronaldheld
Stathis This was mentioned in the TNG technical manual. I do not recall, right, now, which post TOS episodes mentioned it. Ronald On Mar 2, 8:42 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/3/2 ronaldheld ronaldh...@gmail.com

Reality as simplicity

2009-03-09 Thread ronaldheld
Not certain what thread this belongs in so I started up a new one. arxiv.org:0903.1193v1 --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to

Re: Reality as simplicity

2009-03-11 Thread ronaldheld
I thought I would add the paper:Temporal Platonic Metaphysics:arxiv.org:0903.18001v1 On Mar 9, 12:26 pm, ronaldheld ronaldh...@gmail.com wrote: Not certain what thread this belongs in so I started up a new one. arxiv.org:0903.1193v1 --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You

Comments on The Mathematical Universe

2009-04-07 Thread ronaldheld
Arxiv.org:0904.0867v1 I think the author presents some good arguments. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To

Re: Victor Korotkikh

2009-05-14 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: Can you explain your Physics statement in more detail, which I can understand? Ronald On May 13, 11:30 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Thanks Russell, I will take a look. At first sight he makes the same   error with numbers that

No MWI

2009-05-14 Thread ronaldheld
read Aixiv.org:0905.0624v1 (quant-ph) and see if you agree with it Ronald --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this

Re: Victor Korotkikh

2009-05-15 Thread ronaldheld
wrote: Ronald, On 14 May 2009, at 13:19, Ronald (ronaldheld) wrote: Can you explain your Physics statement in more detail, which I can understand? UDA *is* the detailed explanation of that physics statement. So it   would be simpler if you could tell me at which step you have a problem

Re: No MWI

2009-05-15 Thread ronaldheld
I still do not see any arguments against what I read, that one Universe fits observations better than the MWI. Ronald On May 15, 1:01 am, daddycay...@msn.com wrote: On May 14, 9:47 pm, daddycay...@msn.com wrote: On May 14, 4:45 

Re: No MWI

2009-05-19 Thread ronaldheld
I would like to branch away temporarily, due to the Star Trek movie. Is it the case in MWI, that a decision is made in Universe A (destruction of the Kelvin). Before that event, the Universe, or at least the causal part of it has a certain physical configuration. Immediately after that event,

Re: No MWI

2009-05-21 Thread ronaldheld
modified paper from Tegmark: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0905/0905.2182v1.pdf Ronald On May 19, 5:41 pm, ronaldheld ronaldh...@gmail.com wrote: I would like to branch away temporarily, due to the Star Trek movie. Is it the case in MWI, that a decision

Re: Cognitive Theoretic Model of the Universe

2009-06-02 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: Since I program in Fortran, I am uncertain how to interpret things. Ronald On May 31, 1:02 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 30 May 2009, at 23:08, rexallen...@gmail.com wrote: Has anyone on this list ever heard of this?  A theory

Re: Cognitive Theoretic Model of the Universe

2009-06-04 Thread ronaldheld
Russell: Maybe you might be interested in gfortran(http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/ GFortran)? Ronald On Jun 2, 6:38 pm, russell standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote: On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 07:45:22AM -0700, ronaldheld wrote: Bruno:    Since I program

Re: Cognitive Theoretic Model of the Universe

2009-06-05 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: I understand a little better. is there a citition for a version of Church Thesis that all algorithm can be written in FORTRAN? Ronald On Jun 4, 10:49 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Hi Ronald, On 02 Jun 2009, at 16:45, ronaldheld wrote: Bruno

Non unique Universe

2009-07-02 Thread ronaldheld
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0907/0907.0216v1.pdf comments? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To

Re: The seven step series

2009-07-27 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: I am following, but have not commented, because there is nothing controversal. When you are done, can your posts be consolidated into a paper or a document that can be read staright through? Ronald On Jul 23, 9:28 am, Bruno

Re: The seven step series

2009-07-28 Thread ronaldheld
, ronaldheld wrote:   I am following, but have not commented, because there is nothing controversal. Cool. Even the sixth first steps of UDA?   When you are done, can your posts be consolidated into a paper or a document that can be read staright through? I should do that. Bruno

Re: Can mind be a computation if physics is fundamental?

2009-08-07 Thread ronaldheld
As a formally trained Physicist, what do I accept? that Physics is well represented mathematically? That the Multiverse is composed of mathematical structures some of which represent physical laws? Or something else? Ronald On Aug 6, 10:23 pm, Brent

Re: Can mind be a computation if physics is fundamental?

2009-08-10 Thread ronaldheld
I am behind, because I was away delivering Science talk to Star Trek fans. I am uncertain what to take away from this thread, and could use the clarification. As an aside, I read(or tried to) read the SANE paper on the plane. Ronald On Aug 10, 11:24 

Re: Can mind be a computation if physics is fundamental?

2009-08-14 Thread ronaldheld
I think I have at least two problems, not necessarily well formulated. I accept that there are concepts(mathematical) that are not necessrily part of the physical Universe(Multiverse). I do not see that there are only the abstractions. Also, Bruno mentions QM, as being included in COMP. QM is an

A Possible Mathematical Structure for Physics

2009-08-17 Thread ronaldheld
arxiv.org:0908.2063v1 Any comments? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send

Re: A Possible Mathematical Structure for Physics

2009-08-18 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: I have heard of Octonians but have not used them. I do not know anything about intelligible hypostases . Ronald On Aug 18, 2:58 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 17 Aug 2009, at 16:23, ronaldheld wrote: arxiv.org:0908.2063v1 Any comments? Very

Re: A Possible Mathematical Structure for Physics

2009-08-19 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: the Plotinus paper is the first one on your list of publications on your website? Ronald On Aug 18, 10:46 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Ronald, On 18 Aug 2009, at 14:14, ronaldheld wrote: I have heard of Octonians but have not used them. I do

Brain-computer interface and quantum robots

2009-09-10 Thread ronaldheld
arXiv.org/abs/0909.1508 I saw the title and thought of what Bruno would make of it. Any thoughts? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to

Re: Brain-computer interface and quantum robots

2009-09-10 Thread ronaldheld
into 'machine-consciousness' etc. ideas. John M On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 8:06 AM, ronaldheld ronaldh...@gmail.com wrote:  arXiv.org/abs/0909.1508 I saw the title and thought of what Bruno would make of it. Any thoughts?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text

books on logic/computing

2009-09-10 Thread ronaldheld
I thought that I would start a thread to consolidate some of the books useful in following current and old threads. if people alos want to post key papers here, I do not see a problem with that. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are

Re: books on logic/computing

2009-09-18 Thread ronaldheld
a problem to find them, or if you search for other   books. Logicians like to write book, and there are many of them.   Original papers on the UDA and AUDA can be found on my web pages (http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ ). Bruno On 10 Sep 2009, at 21:48, ronaldheld wrote: I thought

Re: books on logic/computing

2009-09-19 Thread ronaldheld
suggestion, for serious studies,  is: 1) Mendelson 2) Boolos 1979 Bruno On 18 Sep 2009, at 15:14, ronaldheld wrote: Bruno: It sounds as if the way to begin is  with the latest Mendelson book.                                 Ronald On Sep 18, 2:55 am, Bruno Marchal marc

Re: Yablo, Quine and Carnap on ontology

2009-09-21 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno and others, here is how a Star Trek transporter work(taken from Memory Alpha): A typical transport sequence began with a coordinate lock, during which the destination was verified and programmed, via the targeting scanners. Obtaining or maintaining a transporter lock enables the

Re: Yablo, Quine and Carnap on ontology

2009-09-23 Thread ronaldheld
in TOS: the enemy within On stardate 1672.1, in 2266, a strange ore had altered the function of the transporter, causing one of the most bizarre transporter accidents on record, in which Captain James T. Kirk was split into two separate entities. No mention of where the extra matter came from. in

Re: books on logic/computing

2009-09-28 Thread ronaldheld
My book has arrived. Perhaps in several months, I will be able to follow the symbolic arguments better? Ronald On Sep 19, 5:38 pm, ronaldheld ronaldh...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks, Bruno. Mendelson is on its way to me.                           Ronald On Sep 18

Re: books on logic/computing

2009-09-30 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: It will take quite a while for Mendelson, so I may ask again when I am finished or want to start something new. Ronald On Sep 29, 12:47 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 28 Sep 2009, at 21:51, ronaldheld wrote

How many universe in the Multiverse?

2009-10-12 Thread ronaldheld
Arxiv:0910.1589v1 Any comments? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send

Real scalars and the Multiverse

2009-11-30 Thread ronaldheld
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0911/0911.4824v1.pdf Can someone read this and explain any relevance it may have? Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to

Re: Real scalars and the Multiverse

2009-12-02 Thread ronaldheld
to think that real numbers (standard or not) are really   construction of the mind (of the universal machine), like comp invites   to consider (with Occam). Best, Bruno On 30 Nov 2009, at 19:18, ronaldheld wrote: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0911/0911.4824v1.pdf  Can someone read

Crystallizing block universe?

2009-12-09 Thread ronaldheld
Anyone want to give this a try and comment? http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0912/0912.0808v1.pdf Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to

Re: Crystallizing block universe?

2009-12-10 Thread ronaldheld
Dec 2009, at 11:25, ronaldheld wrote: Anyone want to give this a try and comment?  http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0912/0912.0808v1.pdf He cites only Isham (very good book, by the way), for the non collapse   view. it may be interesting to describe the crystallization in that   setting

Re: Crystallizing block universe?

2009-12-10 Thread ronaldheld
I should have added this in the previous post. it is an article about time from a different perspective. http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0912/0912.1604v1.pdf Ronald On Dec 10, 1:01 pm, ronaldheld ronaldh...@gmail.com wrote: I have problems accepting some of these approaches. It seems

paper on view of reality

2009-12-18 Thread ronaldheld
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0912/0912.3433.pdf any comments on this? Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from

Re: paper on view of reality

2009-12-19 Thread ronaldheld
. John M   On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 7:18 AM, ronaldheld ronaldh...@gmail.comwrote: http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0912/0912.3433.pdf any comments on this?                    Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group

Re: UDA query

2009-12-29 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: Is there a UD that is implemented in Fortran? Ronald On Dec 29, 4:55 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 28 Dec 2009, at 21:24, Nick Prince wrote: Well, it is better to assume just the axiom of, say, Robinson arithmetic. You assume 0, the

Re: UDA query

2009-12-31 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: yes that is unfortunately true. Ronald On Dec 30, 10:25 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 30 Dec 2009, at 03:29, ronaldheld wrote: Bruno:   Is there a UD that is implemented in Fortran? I don't know. If you know Fortran, it should

new papers on Multiverse/TOE

2009-12-31 Thread ronaldheld
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0912/0912.5367.pdf http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0912/0912.5434v1.pdf I am more interested in comments on the second one. Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

Re: Definition of universe

2010-02-05 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: is there a free version of Theoretical computer science and the natural sciences? Ronald On Feb 4, 2:45 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 04 Feb 2010, at 15:28, Jason Resch wrote: On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Bruno Marchal

which Multiverse?

2010-04-27 Thread ronaldheld
comments on this paper: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1004/1004.0148v1.pdf Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe

first order logic and SR/GR

2010-05-07 Thread ronaldheld
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1005/1005.0960v1.pdf Comments? Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from

NY times article on Tononi

2010-09-21 Thread ronaldheld
Sizing Up Consciousness by Its BitsBy CARL ZIMMER One day in 2007, Dr. Giulio Tononi lay on a hospital stretcher as an anesthesiologist prepared him for surgery. For Dr. Tononi, it was a moment of intellectual exhilaration. He is a distinguished chair in consciousness science at the University of

advice needed for Star Trek talk

2010-11-05 Thread ronaldheld
Several years ago, I gave a talk mostly based on Tegmark's work. I would like to give an updated talk with other POVs within 40 minutes. Any suggestions, considering the Trek fan audience, would be appreciated. Ronald -- You received this message because you

Re: advice needed for Star Trek talk

2010-11-20 Thread ronaldheld
of the next generation is relevant: Q: That is the exploration that awaits you. Not mapping stars and studying nebulae, but charting the unknown possibilities of existence. Jason On Nov 5, 3:42 pm, ronaldheld ronaldh...@gmail.com wrote: Several years ago, I gave a talk mostly based

Re: advice needed for Star Trek talk

2010-11-24 Thread ronaldheld
, Nov 20, 2010 at 2:39 PM, ronaldheld ronaldh...@gmail.com wrote: Jason:  Do you want to add more? I know Q meant that mental exploration was more important than the physical                                      .Ronald On Nov 18, 1:53 pm, Jason jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: Ronald

Re: advice needed for Star Trek talk

2010-11-27 Thread ronaldheld
Jason(and any others) Both. Level IV Universe is hard to explain even if real. Bruno's reality is equally hard to convincing present. Ronald On Nov 26, 12:02 am, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 1:50 PM, ronaldheld ronaldh

Re: advice needed for Star Trek talk

2010-11-30 Thread ronaldheld
Thanks Jason. Not certain how all of that helps. I will have think more before I answer Bruno. Ronald On Nov 28, 5:52 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 27 Nov 2010, at 19:05, ronaldheld wrote: Jason(and any others)   Both. Level IV

Re: advice needed for Star Trek talk

2010-12-01 Thread ronaldheld
kind of objections did people raise?  Perhaps that would help us formulate a line of reasoning which would be more effective. Jason On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 8:15 AM, ronaldheld ronaldh...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Jason. Not certain how all of that helps. I will have think more before I

Brain as quantum computer

2010-12-02 Thread ronaldheld
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/quant-ph/pdf/0205/0205092v8.pdf Bruno(and anyone else) Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To

Re: advice needed for Star Trek talk

2010-12-02 Thread ronaldheld
similar to a Holodeck, where the person is a Holocharacter? I am not certain a UD is physically possible in a finite resource Universe. Ronald On Nov 28, 5:52 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 27 Nov 2010, at 19:05, ronaldheld wrote: Jason(and any others)   Both. Level IV Universe

Re: advice needed for Star Trek talk

2010-12-06 Thread ronaldheld
, then I will interpret UDA from my(physicla scineces POV). Ronald On Dec 2, 10:55 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 02 Dec 2010, at 15:51, ronaldheld wrote: Bruno: I looked at UDA via the SANE paper. I am not certain the the mind is Turing emulatable, but will move onward. OK

Re: advice needed for Star Trek talk

2010-12-10 Thread ronaldheld
...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 06 Dec 2010, at 19:00, ronaldheld wrote: Bruno(and others)  I am going to do this in two posts. The first is my interpretation of your UDA. Since the Brain is a Turing emulatable program running on a biological platform(to start), steps 1-5 are not controversal. Step

Re: advice needed for Star Trek talk

2010-12-13 Thread ronaldheld
Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 11 Dec 2010, at 01:01, ronaldheld wrote: Bruno:  I stand corrected  on steps 6 and 7. I believe I understand your UDA diagrams. OK.  Thanks for saying. Before I can comment, I need to decide waht progrmas are and are not Turing emulatable, All programs

Re: advice needed for Star Trek talk

2010-12-15 Thread ronaldheld
realistically be simulated.  On this Bruno has said, if you don't believe the neuron requires an infinite amount of information to decide whether or not to fire, then you are a mechanist. Jason On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 6:13 PM, ronaldheld ronaldh...@gmail.com wrote: Bruno:  Thanks

Re: advice needed for Star Trek talk

2010-12-18 Thread ronaldheld
: On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 7:57 AM, ronaldheld ronaldh...@gmail.com wrote: Jason:   I do not think a neutron take more trhan a finite amount of voltage to be able to fire. I do wonder if merely replacing the bio parts by processing hardware, do you lose the part of the complexity

Re: advice needed for Star Trek talk

2010-12-19 Thread ronaldheld
at 8:05 AM, ronaldheld ronaldh...@gmail.com wrote: Bruno and Jason   The complexity issue concerns me, perhaps because of the Deep space 9 episode:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Life_Support_(Star_Trek:_Deep_Space_Nine)                                                             Ronald

is the Brain in a superfluid state? Physics of Consciousness

2010-12-20 Thread ronaldheld
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1012/1012.3765v1.pdf I saw this and thought, Bruno. Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to

Re: advice needed for Star Trek talk

2010-12-21 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: Behind in this group. I think that if you had a this Universe and replace the particles with its antiparticles.there should be no difference from the human observer POV. Ronald On Dec 20, 4:51 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 19 Dec 2010, at 18:29, ronaldheld wrote

Re: advice needed for Star Trek talk

2010-12-25 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: Given what I know about the laws of Physics. A matter human in a matter Universe(similar to ours) is Consciousness and self aware. An antimatter human in an antimatter Universe should be expected to be Consciousness and self aware. I do not understand the second to last paragraph. One

Re: Universe on a Chip

2012-10-11 Thread ronaldheld
maybe this will help? Constraints on the Universe as a Numerical Simulation arXiv:1210.1847v1 [hep-ph] 4Oct 2012 Ronald On Oct 10, 2:22 pm, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: On Wednesday, October 10, 2012 12:14:44 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 09 Oct 2012, at

On the problem of a physical “theory of everything”

2012-07-23 Thread ronaldheld
arxiv:1207.4520 is there any meaning to this? Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/kt7-xm6P4VoJ. To post to this group,

Re: Physics and Tautology.

2012-08-02 Thread ronaldheld
If this universe has zero net energy charge and angular momemtum, I see no problem being created via a chaotic inflation scenario. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To view this discussion on the web visit

A digital approach to quantum theory

2012-08-03 Thread ronaldheld
arXiv:1208.0493v1 [quant-ph] anything useful here? Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/o8kakXvUvOIJ. To post to this

Re: Tegmark and UDA

2014-03-21 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno, I have read several over the years but do not save them. Here is the latest one that I read: http://arxiv.org/abs/1403.1599 Ronald Wednesday, March 19, 2014 7:37:52 PM UTC-4, ronaldheld wrote: Assuming chaotic inflation there is no consensus

Re: Tegmark's New Book

2014-01-26 Thread ronaldheld
Without hijacking this massive thread, I am asking if it is worth buying this book, if you are not a believer in the platonic universe, UDA,etc? Ronald On Saturday, January 25, 2014 10:31:25 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: On 26 January 2014 16:27, Stephen Paul King

Re: multiverse talk

2008-07-08 Thread ronaldheld
Thanks for all of the suggestions, past and future. I will be reading the paper by Guariga and Vilenkin In this case finding the correct level to present at is about as difficult as compuring certain measures.I tend to be at a higher level than most of the audience can easily understand, but in

Re: multiverse talk

2008-07-10 Thread ronaldheld
Can someone construct an example I can understand, to compute the nearest distance to a Level I duplicate? Perhaps all of the ones I have read are too coarse estimates? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

Re: multiverse talk

2008-07-12 Thread ronaldheld
Can I explain the Star Trek universe(s) as being a part of Level I or Level III? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To

Re: multiverse talk

2008-07-14 Thread ronaldheld
I would think that Star Trek is Level I, and that Level III adds nothing. The comment that Q(and maybe The Prophets) comes from a Level IV is something I may be able to use if he knows how to change our physical low energy laws to anything that is possible(and suits his current needs). Of course,

Re: Lost and not lost?

2008-11-29 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: My background is in Physics and Astrophysics, with interests in GR and Cosmology. I suppose I need some definitions of terms as well as whether those definitions are used by all of the posters. I have no idea what consciousness is or why the Universe/Multiverse should care. Finally

Re: Lost and not lost?

2008-12-01 Thread ronaldheld
This is going to be crude, but if I understand what Bruno( and others) are saying, there is no Physics or physical universe. There is a (are) large computer program(s) running, some segment of which exhibits consciousness? Does that crudely imply that everything I sense could be considered a

Re: Consciousness and free will

2008-12-03 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: We may be talking different thing but the TOE for Physics does not exist yet. I would think it would be QM and General Relativity and other things we do not know. Could this program be running an evolving mathematical structure or maybe you prefer evolving block universe/multiverse?

Re: Consciousness and free will

2008-12-04 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: I am aware of Everett's many worlds universe, which is predicted on the wavefunction not collapsing. So far, that seems to be experientally so. Not many Physicists take consciousness into account, althought there is a paper I just found today you may be interested in:http://

Re: KIM 1 (was: Lost and not lost 1)

2008-12-12 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: I am uncertain that this was answered. You are starting with mathematics, and going to some Multiversal computation program? If there is no physical universe, what does the computer run on? With no energy, how are your thoughts being generated?

Re: KIM 2.1

2008-12-19 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: I may have missed something in the last two days. I still do not understand. You say this starts with the real world, which to me is the physical universe/Multiverse, but it actually starts with arithmetic. How is there any mathematics with nothing to conceive of it? What are the

Observers and Church/Turing

2011-01-12 Thread ronaldheld
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1101/1101.2198v1.pdf Any comments? Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To

another paper on consciousness and intrinsic awareness

2011-01-13 Thread ronaldheld
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1101/1101.2422.pdf -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

Physical Church-Turing thesis and QM

2011-02-09 Thread ronaldheld
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1102/1102.1612v1.pdf Any comments? Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe

Re: CONSCIOUSNESS AND THE,QUANTUM

2011-03-01 Thread ronaldheld
I see you beat me to posting this. Ronald On Mar 1, 12:55 am, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1102/1102.5339v1.pdf CONSCIOUSNESS AND THE QUANTUM   Don N. Page Theoretical Physics Institute Department of Physics,

Another TOE short paper

2011-03-04 Thread ronaldheld
http://vixra.org/pdf/1103.0005v1.pdf. Bruno may be interested in this one. Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from

The Emergence of Consciousness in the Quantum Universe

2011-03-10 Thread ronaldheld
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1103/1103.1651v1.pdf Here we go again. Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe

Re: TIME warp

2011-05-18 Thread ronaldheld
Are you talking about a Star Trek term or for certain space-times, the ability to go forwards or backwards in time relative to a distant observer? Ronald On May 16, 3:31 pm, selva selvakr1...@gmail.com wrote: hi everyone, can someone explain me what a time warp is ? or why there is a time

QM and MWI

2011-05-20 Thread ronaldheld
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1105/1105.3796v1.pdf. I am curious what people think of this, not just from the DM Point of view. Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post

MULTIVERSE HYPOTHESIS and natural laws

2011-05-24 Thread ronaldheld
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1105/1105.4278.pdf They mentioned Tegmark's Level IV multiverse so I thought i would post the link here. Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this

Re: Bruno's blasphemy.

2011-07-18 Thread ronaldheld
Bruno: I do not know LISP. Any UD code written in Fortran? Ronald On Jul 18, 5:26 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 17 Jul 2011, at 19:52, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be   wrote: The interior

Re: Bruno's blasphemy.

2011-07-20 Thread ronaldheld
...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 19 Jul 2011, at 21:16, meekerdb wrote: On 7/19/2011 11:32 AM, ronaldheld wrote: Given limited resources and for only 1 program, it does not seem logical to learn LISP. Are there Windows or DOS executables of the   UD? FWIW. I use MAPLE and not Mathematica

The Brain Speaks(to Bruno)

2011-07-26 Thread ronaldheld
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1107/1107.4028.pdf Sorry about my title choice. Any comments? Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to

logic and physicists

2011-08-10 Thread ronaldheld
I believe Bruno said this. Could whomever did say that expand upon the phrase? Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to

QM:collapse vs no collapse

2011-08-23 Thread ronaldheld
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1108/1108.4175v1.pdf Any comments? Ronald -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To

  1   2   >