Re: The Computing Spacetime

2012-01-21 Thread Joseph Knight
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 20 Jan 2012, at 07:17, Joseph Knight wrote: On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Stephen, Ronald, The paper is very interesting, on physics, but succumbs directly from the

Re: The Computing Spacetime

2012-01-20 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 20 Jan 2012, at 07:17, Joseph Knight wrote: On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Stephen, Ronald, The paper is very interesting, on physics, but succumbs directly from the argument that any digital physics is bound to be unsuccessful on the

Re: The Computing Spacetime

2012-01-20 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 20 Jan 2012, at 07:17, Joseph Knight wrote: On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Stephen, Ronald, The paper is very interesting, on physics, but succumbs directly from the argument that any digital physics is bound to be unsuccessful on the

Re: The Computing Spacetime

2012-01-19 Thread Joseph Knight
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Stephen, Ronald, The paper is very interesting, on physics, but succumbs directly from the argument that any digital physics is bound to be unsuccessful on the mind-body problem by being still physicalist. The body

Re: The Computing Spacetime

2012-01-18 Thread Bruno Marchal
Stephen, Ronald, The paper is very interesting, on physics, but succumbs directly from the argument that any digital physics is bound to be unsuccessful on the mind-body problem by being still physicalist. The body problem is a problem of computer science, that is arithmetic, once we bet