On 15 Jan 2013, at 08:26, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/11/2013 10:19 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 10 Jan 2013, at 19:59, meekerdb wrote:
Since most of these people were theists, I found it easier to just
say, I'm an atheist, because that succinctly conveys (to those
who respect the meaning of
On 1/11/2013 10:19 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 10 Jan 2013, at 19:59, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/10/2013 8:02 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 20:17, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/9/2013 2:48 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 01:01, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/8/2013 12:25 PM, Alberto
On 11 Jan 2013, at 17:37, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
I don't believe that you can explain perception without God
And how do you explain perception WITH God except by saying God
just did it? If the God theory could actually explain
On 11 Jan 2013, at 21:42, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/11/2013 10:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 10 Jan 2013, at 20:02, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/10/2013 8:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Empirical proofs can be ostensive.
But I prefer not using proof for that. It can only be
misleading when we do
], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/11/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Richard Ruquist
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-10, 12:22:44
Subject: Re: Whoever invented the word God invented atheism.
wiki- Charles' law
On 10 Jan 2013, at 19:59, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/10/2013 8:02 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 20:17, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/9/2013 2:48 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 01:01, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/8/2013 12:25 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
Le me add some meat here
-01-10, 13:27:52
Subject: Re: Whoever invented the word God invented atheism.
On 1/10/2013 6:20 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
I have never understood what it means to be atheist. Sometimes it appears to
mean existentialist not Christian god, another appearance is not organized
religion
Dear Bruno:
- As I tried to show in robotic Truth, religion is a neccesity for the
operation of social beings.
For all machines, actually. Even when isolated. the robotic truth can be
approached by introspection when the machine complexity is above the Löbian
threshold.
That´s absolutely
The Universe ( as a whole) is a Double World: next to Matter World
( a few % of whole mass of Universe) exist Vacuum World
( with more than 90% of whole mass of Universe).
Question:
How can the more than 90% of Vacuum Mass in the Universe
(dark mass, dark energy, quantum virtual particles,
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:21 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net
socra...@bezeqint.net wrote:
Charles Law is appropriate at or near absolute zero ,
because this law belongs to the particles of ' ideal gas' ,
it means that these particles can exist in the absolute vacuum:
T=0K.
no, not OK
--
You
the following content -
From: socra...@bezeqint.net
Receiver: Everything List
Time: 2013-01-11, 06:22:23
Subject: Re: Whoever invented the word God invented atheism.
The Universe ( as a whole) is a Double World: next to Matter World
( a few % of whole mass of Universe) exist Vacuum World
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
I don't believe that you can explain perception without God
And how do you explain perception WITH God except by saying God just did
it? If the God theory could actually explain something and not just chant
God did it I'd go to
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
Physicists often do experiemnts on crystals at 0 oK or near there.
There is no such thing as nearly zero just as there is no such thing as
nearly infinite or nearly pregnant; the Third law of Thermodynamics says
that you
What is vacuum?
=.
The problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion,
is the basic problem now before physics. Really, if you can’t
correctly
describe the vacuum, how it is possible to expect a correct
description
of something more complex?
/ Paul Dirac ./
#
The most fundamental
On 10 Jan 2013, at 20:02, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/10/2013 8:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Empirical proofs can be ostensive.
But I prefer not using proof for that. It can only be misleading
when we do applied logic. I prefer to call that empirical
evidences.
So I think the two kinds
is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Richard Ruquist
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-10, 12:22:44
Subject: Re: Whoever invented the word God invented atheism.
wiki- Charles' law (also known as the law of volumes
On 1/11/2013 8:37 AM, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net
mailto:rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
I don't believe that you can explain perception without God
And how do you explain perception WITH God except by saying God just did it? If the
God theory
On 1/11/2013 10:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 10 Jan 2013, at 20:02, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/10/2013 8:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Empirical proofs can be ostensive.
But I prefer not using proof for that. It can only be misleading when we do applied
logic. I prefer to call that empirical
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 1:06 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net
socra...@bezeqint.net wrote:
Can we say that physical particles are often localised volumes
that are full of infinities of discrete number relations
Sounds to much physicalist for me (or comp).
--
Particles in the vacuum (
soc,
that truth referring to what Bruno said. may or may not be true.
You did not read the thread.
Richard
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 1:00 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net
socra...@bezeqint.net wrote:
Agreed, and I hope that truth is true .
Richard
Truth is true !!!
/ Richard /
Very good proof. .
. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: meekerdb
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-09, 15:55:18
Subject: Re: Whoever invented the word God invented atheism.
On 1/9/2013 7:05 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 12:35, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Wed
On Jan 10, 12:12 pm, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Particles in the vacuum ( T=0K ) have no volumes
( according to the laws of thermodynamics )
Wrong
According to Charle’s law and the consequence of the
third law of thermodynamics as the thermodynamic temperature
of a
On 09 Jan 2013, at 18:56, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 16:17, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 12:35, Richard Ruquist
On 09 Jan 2013, at 20:17, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/9/2013 2:48 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 01:01, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/8/2013 12:25 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
Le me add some meat here
Nah. It's just your wishful thinking that everybody has to
believe in God.
All
On 09 Jan 2013, at 21:55, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/9/2013 7:05 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 12:35, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 08 Jan 2013, at 15:59, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Whoever invented
wiki- Charles' law (also known as the law of volumes) is an
experimental gas law which describes how gases tend to expand when
heated.
Richard- Thermodynamics of gases breaks down near absolute where most
materials have already changed phase to liquid (usually BEC) or solid.
Charles Law is
On 1/10/2013 6:20 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
I have never understood what it means to be atheist. Sometimes it appears to mean
existentialist not Christian god, another appearance is not organized religion,
which both appear reasonable.
Intuitively however, I've always asked myself:
On 1/10/2013 8:02 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 20:17, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/9/2013 2:48 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 01:01, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/8/2013 12:25 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
Le me add some meat here
Nah. It's just your wishful thinking that
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 7:27 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 1/10/2013 6:20 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
I have never understood what it means to be atheist. Sometimes it appears
to mean existentialist not Christian god, another appearance is not
organized religion, which
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 8:41 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 1/10/2013 11:31 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 7:27 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 1/10/2013 6:20 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
I have never understood what it means
On 08 Jan 2013, at 15:59, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Whoever invented the word God invented atheism.
Not necessarily. The modern notion of God comes with the platonist,
and was almost a synonym with truth. There was an implicit, but
reasonable assumption, that humans search
On 08 Jan 2013, at 21:25, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
Le me add some meat here
We can not reduce the concept of God to a boring principle that we
need to put somewhere. Like a ugly furniture inherited from the
grand-parents which for its sentimental value we have to keep and
locate
On 09 Jan 2013, at 01:01, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/8/2013 12:25 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
Le me add some meat here
Nah. It's just your wishful thinking that everybody has to believe
in God.
All correct and self-introspective machine will believe in (some)
God. Keep in mind that
-
From: Richard Ruquist
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-08, 11:37:47
Subject: Re: Whoever invented the word God invented atheism.
that reminds me that we do not really know what a word means
until we understand what the opposite stands for.
a sorta duality that math may be based
is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-09, 05:37:48
Subject: Re: Whoever invented the word God invented atheism.
On 08 Jan 2013, at 21:25, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
Le
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 08 Jan 2013, at 15:59, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Whoever invented the word God invented atheism.
Not necessarily. The modern notion of God comes with the platonist, and was
almost a synonym with truth.
, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-09, 05:37:48
Subject: Re: Whoever invented the word God invented atheism.
On 08 Jan 2013, at 21:25, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
Le me add some meat here
We can
On 09 Jan 2013, at 12:35, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 08 Jan 2013, at 15:59, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Whoever invented the word God invented atheism.
Not necessarily. The modern notion of God comes with
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 12:35, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 08 Jan 2013, at 15:59, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Whoever invented the word God
On 09 Jan 2013, at 16:17, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 12:35, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 08 Jan 2013, at 15:59, Roger Clough
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 16:17, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 12:35, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Bruno Marchal
On 1/9/2013 2:48 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 01:01, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/8/2013 12:25 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
Le me add some meat here
Nah. It's just your wishful thinking that everybody has to believe in God.
All correct and self-introspective machine will believe
On 1/9/2013 7:05 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 12:35, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 08 Jan 2013, at 15:59, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Whoever invented the word God invented atheism.
Not
Agreed, and I hope that truth is true .
Richard
Truth is true !!!
/ Richard /
Very good proof. . .
. . . . and . . ‘. . by Beauty that beautiful things are
beautiful . . .
by largeness that large things are large and larger things larger,
and by smallness that smaller things ate smaller .
Can we say that physical particles are often localised volumes
that are full of infinities of discrete number relations
Sounds to much physicalist for me (or comp).
--
Particles in the vacuum ( T=0K ) have no volumes
( according to the laws of thermodynamics )
therefore we think
that reminds me that we do not really know what a word means
until we understand what the opposite stands for.
a sorta duality that math may be based on
that may even be the basis of existence
of how something can come
from nothing.
RR
a semantic toe
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Roger Clough
On 1/8/2013 12:25 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
Le me add some meat here
Nah. It's just your wishful thinking that everybody has to believe in God.
We can not reduce the concept of God to a boring principle that we need to put
somewhere. Like a ugly furniture inherited from the
On 1/8/2013 4:42 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
2013/1/9 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
On 1/8/2013 12:25 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
Le me add some meat here
Nah. It's just your wishful thinking that everybody has to believe in God.
48 matches
Mail list logo