Well yawn, what else would we expect? I do though wonder how they account
for the differential gravitational acceleration due to tidal interaction
and Weyl curvature.
LC
On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 5:26:14 PM UTC-5 johnk...@gmail.com
wrote:
> The "MICROSCOPE" experiment was devised
The "MICROSCOPE" experiment was devised to test Einstein's equivalence
principle with 100 times greater precision than had ever been achieved
before, the idea that all objects fall in a gravitational field at exactly
the same speed. MICROSCOPE consisted of a 402 gram platinum cylinder inside
a 300
this article from The New York Times. Because I'm a subscriber,
you'll be able to read it for free.
Astronomers Find What Might Be the Most Distant Galaxy Yet
Is the object a galaxy of primordial stars or a black hole knocking on the
door of time? The Webb space telescope may help answer that question
ubject: Re: The best video yet about January 6
On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 6:17 PM wrote:
> I tell you the main threat to my or your personal safety are not currently
> the goose-steppers, but instead, globalist corporations bribing US pols.
No, bribery is illegal and what those corporations did
On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 6:17 PM wrote:
> * > I tell you the main threat to my or your personal safety are not
> currently the goose-steppers, but instead, globalist corporations bribing
> US pols.*
>
No, bribery is illegal and what those corporations did was not illegal. And
why is it not
Fascist hating eyes in this direction and render forth your reply-
https://spssi.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10./asap.12253
-Original Message-
From: 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, Jul 5, 2021 8:03 pm
Subject: Re: The best video yet about
t; in 2020 in their "outrage" over police killings as no
big thing. Thus, I too adopt your opinion and become dismissive as
well, even though the big wigs were the only ones disturbed while the
victims of BLM and Antifa number in the thousands. Do you know what
the latest rumor (as yet unproven)
g. Thus, I too adopt your opinion
and become dismissive as well, even though the big wigs were the only ones
disturbed while the victims of BLM and Antifa number in the thousands. Do you
know what the latest rumor (as yet unproven) was that the shooter of Ashli
Babbitt was one of Mike Pence's se
to me your motivation is a riddle, wrapped in a
mystery, inside an enigma.
*> we must be prepared for whatever nutcase strikes. *
>
Republicans don't yet have a monopoly on nutcases, but thanks to Trump and
Qanon they're getting close.
> *> This means to use and apply the 2nd amend
against Bubba Clinton. You may be
obsessed about the man, but I am not.
-Original Message-
From: John Clark
To: spudboy...@aol.com
Cc: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, Jul 5, 2021 5:42 am
Subject: Re: The best video yet about January 6
On Sun, Jul 4, 2021 at 7:14 PM wrote
On Sun, Jul 4, 2021 at 7:14 PM wrote:
*> You want us all to be nazis because you need us all to be nazis because
> you hate orange man.*
>
If not "Nazi" what would you call Trump's mob of thugs who beat a police
officer to death and violently invaded the Capital Building on its most
important
their own asses.
If there was a conspiracy to rob orange man at the ballot box, (which I have
yet to see convincing evidence of), it surely wasn't the recipients' of
corporate largesse, BLM +Antifa, but the boards of directors themselves. What
motivation you ask? I would say China trade money,
, or not?
-Original Message-
From: John Clark
To: spudboy...@aol.com
Cc: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sun, Jul 4, 2021 6:57 am
Subject: Re: The best video yet about January 6
On Sun, Jul 4, 2021 at 12:00 AM wrote:
> Remember John, we have had months of democratic party rioting in democra
> resources and production. Enjoy. (non-political)
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uznXI8wrdag
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: John Clark
> To: spudb...@aol.com
> Cc: everyth...@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Sat, Jul 3, 2021 6:11 am
> Subject: Re: The best video yet about J
apitol Building,
but Trump's thugs did. And I repeat the question I've been asking you over
and over again but have yet to receive an answer: *WHAT THE HELL DOES THE
BLACK LIVES MATTERS PROTESTS HAVE TO DO WITH DONALD TRUMP'S COUP D'ETAT
ATTEMPT?!*
John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at Ex
uction. Enjoy.
(non-political)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uznXI8wrdag
-Original Message-
From: John Clark
To: spudboy...@aol.com
Cc: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sat, Jul 3, 2021 6:11 am
Subject: Re: The best video yet about January 6
On Fri, Jul 2, 20
On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 2:26 PM wrote:
>> This is BY FAR the best video I've yet seen that documents the events
>> of January 6, minute by minute, as Trump's thugs attempt to take over the
>> government:
>> How Trump Supporters Took the U.S. Capitol
>> &l
Laff of the day!
-Original Message-
From: John Clark
To: 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List
Sent: Fri, Jul 2, 2021 12:47 pm
Subject: The best video yet about January 6
This is BY FAR the best video I've yet seen that documents the events of
January 6, minute by minute, as Trump's
This is BY FAR the best video I've yet seen that documents the events of
January 6, minute by minute, as Trump's thugs attempt to take over the
government:
How Trump Supporters Took the U.S. Capitol
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWJVMoe7OY0>
John K ClarkSee what's on my ne
.
Yet it is not too hard to imagine a 20 solar mass BH that orbits another
large star, where the star is consumed. So this results in a larger mass
BH. This might then over time occur again. It is possible one of these BHs
in the 85 + 66 solar mass BHs came from a prior BH merger. That does seem
In today's issue of Physical Review Letters the two Lego detectors in the
US and the Virgo detector in Italy announced they had detected on May 21
2019 the gravitational waves from the merger of two Black Holes of 65 and
85 Solar masses which produced a Black Hole of 142 solar masses with 8
solar
The Thirty Meter Telescope on top of Mauna Kea would have been by far the
largest telescope in the world , but now it looks like it will never be
built because today the Hawaiian Supreme Court rescinded its construction
permit ; they think it would offend the religious sensibilities of the
native
This world of dew
is only a world of dew -
and yet, and yet...
-- Kobayashi Issa, after the death of his daughter.
This world of quantum states
is only a world of quantum states -
and yet, and yet...
-- Rex Allen, after a very cold shower.
--
You received this message because you
...and yet, and yet, one has this ineffable feeling there's more to life...?
On 5 December 2013 03:02, Rex Allen rexallen31...@gmail.com wrote:
This world of dew
is only a world of dew -
and yet, and yet...
-- Kobayashi Issa, after the death of his daughter.
This world of quantum states
Yet another interpretation of the M-M experiment (that light travelled
at the same speed regardless of direction) is that as the Bible says, the
earth is fixed, and presumably the aether with it. So no relative motion
problem.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/11/2013
Forever
://www.kurzweilai.net/the-real-reasons-we-dont-have-agi-yet
Ben Goertzel's article that hibbsa sent and linked to above says
in
paragraph 7 that,I salute David Deutsch’s boldness, in writing
and
thinking about a field where he obviously doesn’t have much
practical grounding. Sometimes the views
Mars Rovers,
have limited self-models (where am I, what's my battery
charge,...) that they need to perform their functions, but they
don't have general intelligence (yet).
Brent
--
Could the efficiency of the computation be subject to
modeling? My thinking is that if an AI could rewire
where they need a
self-model. They are not members of a social community. Some simpler systems, like Mars
Rovers, have limited self-models (where am I, what's my battery charge,...) that they need
to perform their functions, but they don't have general intelligence (yet).
Brent
--
You
On 08.10.2012 20:45 Alberto G. Corona said the following:
Deutsch is right about the need to advance in Popperian
epistemology, which ultimately is evolutionary epistemology.
You may want to read Three Worlds by Karl Popper. Then you see where to
Popperian epistemology can evolve.
“To sum
2012/10/9 Evgenii Rudnyi use...@rudnyi.ru:
On 08.10.2012 20:45 Alberto G. Corona said the following:
Deutsch is right about the need to advance in Popperian
epistemology, which ultimately is evolutionary epistemology.
You may want to read Three Worlds by Karl Popper. Then you see where to
intelligence
(yet).
Brent
--
Could the efficiency of the computation be subject to modeling? My
thinking is that if an AI could rewire itself for some task to more
efficiently solve that task...
--
Onward!
Stephen
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
On 08 Oct 2012, at 20:50, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Deutsch is right.
Deutsch is not completely wrong, just unaware of the progress in
theoretical computer science, which explains why some paths are
necessarily long, and can help to avoid the confusion between
consciousness, intelligence,
On 08 Oct 2012, at 23:39, Russell Standish wrote:
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 01:13:35PM -0400, Richard Ruquist wrote:
The real reasons we don’t have AGI yet
A response to David Deutsch’s recent article on AGI
October 8, 2012 by Ben Goertzel
Thanks for posting this, Richard. I was thinking
have general
intelligence (yet).
Unlike PA and ZF and Lôbian entity which have already the maximal
possible noyion of self (both in the 3p and 1p sense).
But PA and ZF have no amount at all of reasonable local incarnation
(reasonable with respect of doing things on Earth, or on Mars).
Mars
then this is the perfect condition for a foundation of
eplistemology, and an absolute meaning of truth.
2012/10/9 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be:
On 08 Oct 2012, at 23:39, Russell Standish wrote:
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 01:13:35PM -0400, Richard Ruquist wrote:
The real reasons we don’t have AGI yet
A response
their functions, but they don't have general intelligence (yet).
Brent
--
Could the efficiency of the computation be subject to modeling? My thinking is that
if an AI could rewire itself for some task to more efficiently solve that task...
I don't see why not. A genetic-algorithm might
to perform their functions, but they don't have general
intelligence (yet).
Brent
--
Could the efficiency of the computation be subject to modeling?
My thinking is that if an AI could rewire itself for some task to
more efficiently solve that task...
Betting on self-consistency
charge,...) that
they need to perform their functions, but they don't have general
intelligence (yet).
Brent
--
Could the efficiency of the computation be subject to modeling?
My thinking is that if an AI could rewire itself for some task to
more efficiently solve that task...
I don't
my battery charge,...) that
they need to perform their functions, but they don't have general
intelligence (yet).
Brent
--
Could the efficiency of the computation be subject to modeling?
My thinking is that if an AI could rewire itself for some task to
more efficiently solve that task
autographed it!
On 09/10/2012, at 8:39 AM, Russell Standish wrote:
The problem that exercises me (when I get a chance to exercise it) is
that of creativity. David Deutsch correctly identifies that this is one of
the main impediments to AGI. Yet biological evolution is a creative
process
It just may provide you that flash of insight you hanker for; that's my grand
hope, anyway.
here's a snippet:
There may be no reason to say something until after it has been said. Once it
has been said a context develops to support it, and yet it would never have
been produced by a context
The real reasons we don’t have AGI yet
A response to David Deutsch’s recent article on AGI
October 8, 2012 by Ben Goertzel
(Credit: iStockphoto)
As we noted in a recent post, physicist David Deutsch said the field
of “artificial general intelligence” or AGI has made “no progress
whatever during
How David Deutsch can watch a computer beat the 2 best human Jeopardy!
players on planet Earth and then say that AI has made “no progress whatever
during the entire six decades of its existence” is a complete mystery to me.
John K Clark
--
You received this message because you are subscribed
On 10/8/2012 1:13 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote:
except from
/The real reasons we don’t have AGI yet/
A response to David Deutsch’s recent article on AGI
October 8, 2012 by Ben Goertzel
So in this view, the main missing ingredient in AGI so far is
“cognitive synergy”: the fitting-together
Deutsch is right about the need to advance in Popperian epistemology,
which ultimately is evolutionary epistemology. How evolution makes a
portion of matter ascertain what is truth in virtue of what and for
what purpose. The idea of intelligence need a knowledge of what is
truth but also a motive
Deutsch is right. Searle is right. Genuine AGI can only come when thoughts
are driven by feeling and will rather than programmatic logic. It's a
fundamental misunderstanding to assume that feeling can be generated by
equipment which is incapable of caring about itself. Without personal
On 10/8/2012 11:45 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
Deutsch is right about the need to advance in Popperian epistemology,
which ultimately is evolutionary epistemology. How evolution makes a
portion of matter ascertain what is truth in virtue of what and for
what purpose. The idea of intelligence
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 01:13:35PM -0400, Richard Ruquist wrote:
The real reasons we don’t have AGI yet
A response to David Deutsch’s recent article on AGI
October 8, 2012 by Ben Goertzel
Thanks for posting this, Richard. I was thinking of writing my own
detailed response to David
On 10/8/2012 5:39 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 01:13:35PM -0400, Richard Ruquist wrote:
The real reasons we don’t have AGI yet
A response to David Deutsch’s recent article on AGI
October 8, 2012 by Ben Goertzel
Thanks for posting this, Richard. I was thinking
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 06:49:12PM -0400, Stephen P. King wrote:
Hi Russell,
Question: Why has little if any thought been given in AGI to
self-modeling and some capacity to track the model of self under the
evolutionary transformations?
Its not my field - general evolutionary
On 10/8/2012 7:37 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 06:49:12PM -0400, Stephen P. King wrote:
Hi Russell,
Question: Why has little if any thought been given in AGI to
self-modeling and some capacity to track the model of self under the
evolutionary transformations?
Its
it!
On 09/10/2012, at 8:39 AM, Russell Standish wrote:
The problem that exercises me (when I get a chance to exercise it) is
that of creativity. David Deutsch correctly identifies that this is one of
the main impediments to AGI. Yet biological evolution is a creative
process, one for which
have not yet grasp the seven step of UDA, to
take it easy here. AUDA is really far more mathematically involved
than UDA. UDA needs just the notion of universal machine. AUDA needs
the notion of Löbian machine which can be grasped when you understand
how quick a universal machine can
Bruno, I would like to understand your arguments at a technical level,
so I started reading your March 2007 paper. But I got kinda bogged
down near the end of Section 2. Could you expand on the paragraph
that begins with Let us define an arithmetical realisation R by a
function which
Le 04-sept.-06, à 16:12, 1Z a écrit :
Bruno Marchal wrote:
Le 04-sept.-06, à 02:56, 1Z a écrit :
Why should a belief in other minds (which I do not directly
experience)
be more reasonable thant a belief in unexperienced primary matter ?
It's a question of consistency.
Attributing
Bruno Marchal wrote:
Le 04-sept.-06, à 02:56, 1Z a écrit :
Why should a belief in other minds (which I do not directly experience)
be more reasonable thant a belief in unexperienced primary matter ?
It's a question of consistency.
Attributing mind to others explains many things.
Le 30-août-06, à 21:26, 1Z (Peter D. Jones) a écrit :
How do you escape solipsism without embracing materialism ?
You can escape solipsism by embracing *any* kind of *objective*
idealism (inspired by mathematical structures or not).
Objective idealisms are not in fashion today, I know,
Bruno Marchal wrote:
Le 30-août-06, à 21:26, 1Z (Peter D. Jones) a écrit :
How do you escape solipsism without embracing materialism ?
You can escape solipsism by embracing *any* kind of *objective*
idealism (inspired by mathematical structures or not).
Why should a belief in other
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Peter Jones writes:
Saying that there is a material substrate which has certain
properties is just a working
assumption to facilitate thinking about the real world. It may turn
out that if we dig into
quarks very deeply there is nothing
Le Wednesday 30 Août 2006 21:26, 1Z a écrit :
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Peter Jones writes:
Saying that there is a material substrate which has certain
properties is just a working assumption to facilitate thinking
about the real world. It may turn out that if we dig into
Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Le Wednesday 30 Août 2006 21:26, 1Z a écrit :
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Peter Jones writes:
Saying that there is a material substrate which has certain
properties is just a working assumption to facilitate thinking
about the real world. It may
Peter Jones writes:
Saying that there is a material substrate which has certain properties
is just a working
assumption to facilitate thinking about the real world. It may turn out
that if we dig into
quarks very deeply there is nothing substantial there at all, but
Peter Jones writes:
Saying that there is a material substrate which has certain properties is
just a working
assumption to facilitate thinking about the real world. It may turn out
that if we dig into
quarks very deeply there is nothing substantial there at all, but solid
matter
Peter Jones writes:
By youur definitions, it's a straight choice between metaphysics and
solipsism.
I choose metaphsyics.
We can posit the unobservable to expalint he observable.
Solipsism is a metaphysical position.
(BTW: it it is wrong to posit an unobserved substrate, why is it
OK
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Brent Meeker writes:
Saying that there is a material substrate which has certain properties is
just a working
assumption to facilitate thinking about the real world. It may turn out
that if we dig into
quarks very deeply there is nothing substantial
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Peter Jones writes:
Saying that there is a material substrate which has certain properties is
just a working
assumption to facilitate thinking about the real world. It may turn out
that if we dig into
quarks very deeply there is nothing substantial
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Peter Jones writes:
By youur definitions, it's a straight choice between metaphysics and
solipsism.
I choose metaphsyics.
We can posit the unobservable to expalint he observable.
Solipsism is a metaphysical position.
A minimal one, that refuses to posit
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
There is good reason to believe that there is some sort of reality out there
as opposed to the
solipsistic alternative, but there is less reason to believe that there is
some basic material substrate
on which the various properties of physical objects are hung.
Le 27-août-06, à 19:36, 1Z a écrit :
Bruno Marchal wrote:
Le 26-août-06, à 22:44, Brent Meeker a écrit :
I understand Peters objection to regarding a mere bundle of
properties as existent. But I don't understand why one needs a
propertyless
substrate. Why not just say that some
Le 27-août-06, à 19:41, 1Z a écrit :
But you don't really address the existence question. You just loosely
assume it is the
same thing as truth.
I just assume that the existence of a number is equivalent with the
intended truth of an existential
proposition written in a theory about
Le 27-août-06, à 21:41, Brent Meeker a écrit :
I put working assumption in scare quotes because I think the fact
that we can
create models of the world that are successful over a wide domain of
phenomena is
evidence for an underlying reality. It's not conclusive evidence, but
reality
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Peter Jones writes:
By youur definitions, it's a straight choice between metaphysics and
solipsism.
I choose metaphsyics.
We can posit the unobservable to expalint he observable.
Solipsism is a metaphysical position.
(BTW: it it is wrong to posit an
Brent Meeker wrote:
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Peter Jones writes:
By youur definitions, it's a straight choice between metaphysics and
solipsism.
I choose metaphsyics.
We can posit the unobservable to expalint he observable.
Solipsism is a metaphysical position.
(BTW: it
Environment-induced decoherence and superselection have been a subject of
intensive research over the past two decades, yet their implications for the
foundational problems of quantum mechanics, most notably the quantum
measurement
problem, have remained a matter of great controversy
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Brent meeker writes:
But even existence can be defined as a bundle of properties. If I am
wondering whether the pencil on my desk exists I can look at it, pick it up,
tap it and so on. If my hand passes through it when I try to pick it up
then maybe it is just
Brent Meeker writes:
Saying that there is a material substrate which has certain properties is
just a working
assumption to facilitate thinking about the real world. It may turn out
that if we dig into
quarks very deeply there is nothing substantial there at all, but solid
Le 25-août-06, à 23:24, 1Z a écrit :
AR as a claim about truth is implied by comoputationalism, and is
not enough to support the real (=as real as I am) existence
of the UD.
It is you who come up with a notion of real existence. You are reifying
I don't know which theory.
AR as a
Le 26-août-06, à 22:44, Brent Meeker a écrit :
I understand Peters objection to regarding a mere bundle of
properties as existent. But I don't understand why one needs a
propertyless
substrate. Why not just say that some bundles of properties are
instantiated and
some aren't.
I
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Brent meeker writes:
But even existence can be defined as a bundle of properties. If I am
wondering whether the pencil on my desk exists I can look at it, pick it
up,
tap it and so on. If my hand passes through it when I try to pick it up
then maybe
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Brent Meeker writes:
Saying that there is a material substrate which has certain properties is
just a working
assumption to facilitate thinking about the real world. It may turn out
that if we dig into
quarks very deeply there is nothing substantial
Bruno Marchal wrote:
Le 25-août-06, à 23:24, 1Z a écrit :
AR as a claim about truth is implied by comoputationalism, and is
not enough to support the real (=as real as I am) existence
of the UD.
It is you who come up with a notion of real existence.
I am starting with the reality my
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Brent Meeker writes:
Saying that there is a material substrate which has certain properties is
just a working
assumption to facilitate thinking about the real world. It may turn out that
if we dig into
quarks very deeply there is nothing substantial there at
- Original Message -
From: Stathis Papaioannou [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Brent Meeker everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 7:52 AM
Subject: RE: Rép: ROADMAP (well, not yet really...
Brent Meeker writes:
Saying that there is a material substrate which has
1Z wrote:
AR as a claim about truth is implied by comoputationalism, and is
not enough to support the real (=as real as I am) existence
of the UD.
It is you who come up with a notion of real existence.
I am starting with the reality my own existence.
That is an *empirical*
Peter Jones writes:
Matter is a bare substrate with no properties of its own. The question
may well be asked at this point: what roles does it perform ? Why not
dispense with matter and just have bundles of properties -- what does
matter add to a merely abstract set of properties? The answer
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Peter Jones writes:
Matter is a bare substrate with no properties of its own. The question
may well be asked at this point: what roles does it perform ? Why not
dispense with matter and just have bundles of properties -- what does
matter add to a merely abstract
Brent meeker writes:
But even existence can be defined as a bundle of properties. If I am
wondering whether the pencil on my desk exists I can look at it, pick it
up,
tap it and so on. If my hand passes through it when I try to pick it up
then maybe it is just an illusion.
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
No, it won't be bored because there is no way for it to know that it is going
through the
first or the second run. The point I was trying to make is that there is no
real basis for
distinguishing between a recording and a program,
There is a basis for
in a somethingist
way, that means all physics is materialist.
It can also provide support for time and qulia, and
explain away HP universes.
All serious people in the philosophy of mind agree that the mind-body
problem is not yet solved.
There is difference between providing an explanation
John,
Le 23-août-06, à 22:24, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
As I 'believe': anything recognized by our 'senses' are our mental
interpretations of the unattainable 'reality' (if we condone its
validity). My world is a posteriori.
This is almost my favorite way to explain Plato in one
that the mind-body
problem is not yet solved. Even Dennett agrees on this in the last
chapter of his consciousness explained. Matter makes things worst
because, at least with comp, we have to justify it without positing it.
2) Numbers, and the UD, by existing just in the usual sense of realist
Peter Jones writes (quoting Bruno Marchal):
People who believes that inputs (being either absolute-material or
relative-platonical) are needed for consciousness should not believe
that we can be conscious in a dream, given the evidence that the brain
is almost completely cut out from the
Le 22-août-06, à 18:06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
So where is the key to translate number-monsters into
thought-monsters?
In front of you. Computer or universal machine, or universal numbers.
More explanation in the posts.
Bruno
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
Le 23-août-06, à 03:58, Brent Meeker a écrit :
People who believes that inputs (being either absolute-material or
relative-platonical) are needed for consciousness should not believe
that we can be conscious in a dream, given the evidence that the brain
is almost completely cut out from
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Brent Meeker writes:
Almost is not completely. In any case, I don't think consciousness is
maintained
indefinitely with no inputs. I think a brain-in-a-vat would go into an
endless
loop without external stimulus.
That's an assumption,
No, it has
Wednesday, August 23, 2006 10:31
AM
Subject: Re: Platonism vs Realism WAS:
ROADMAP (well, not yet really...
Le 23-août-06, à 03:58, Brent Meeker a écrit
: People who believes that inputs (being either
absolute-material or relative-platonical) are needed for
consciousness should not beli
- Original Message -
From: Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 7:56 AM
Subject: Re: Rép: ROADMAP (well, not yet really...
Le 22-août-06, à 18:06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
So where is the key to translate number
Le 19-août-06, à 21:13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John M.) a écrit :
BTW I have a problem with the perfect 6:
ITS DIVISORS are 1,2,3,6, the sum of which is 12, not 6 and it looks
that
there is NO other perfect number in this sense either.
I have define a number to be perfect when it is equal to
tad-biggereverything-list@googlegroups.com/x-tad-biggerx-tad-bigger /x-tad-bigger
x-tad-biggerSent:/x-tad-biggerx-tad-bigger Monday, August 21, 2006 6:39 AM/x-tad-bigger
x-tad-biggerSubject:/x-tad-biggerx-tad-bigger Re: Rép: ROADMAP (well, not yet really.../x-tad-bigger
skip
I already told you tha
Brent meeker writes (quoting Peter Jones, Quentin Anciaux and SP):
Hi,
Le Dimanche 20 Août 2006 05:17, Stathis Papaioannou a écrit :
Peter Jones writes (quoting SP):
What about an inputless computer program, running deterministically
like a recording. Would that count as a program at
1 - 100 of 274 matches
Mail list logo
