Re: Everything List FAQ/Glossary/Wiki
Jason, the site is great, maybe greater than I can realize today. I, as a practical computer illiterate, (never learned any computerese courses, not even from books) sat before it with awe, - admiring that it works! I might have missed it when I tried: I did not find a place to look up topics (as in an index) to read about - to my choice. Clivkably, or advised under what name to find it, not 'included' in some topic, but alphabetically. Search seemed to work like a computer: lookiong for 'exact format' only. Maybe this is too hard, however I trust your skills, professor. John Mikes - Original Message - From: Jason Resch To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 5:57 PM Subject: Everything List FAQ/Glossary/Wiki John M mentioned in a recent post that many on the Everything List may have conflicting or poor understandings of all the various terminology used on the list. Hal Ruhl brought up the fact that someone had previously tried to maintain an acronym list and FAQ for the Everything List. I thought that a wiki would suit this role rather nicely, and offered to set one up for the list. I've finished setting up the site and it is currently running on a webhost which I use and have much underutilized space on. The URL is: http://everythingwiki.gcn.cx/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page I envision the wiki being used to explain the various concepts, acronyms, and theories so often mentioned on this list. Every account created on the wiki has its own dedicated page, which I think would be an ideal place for people to describe their backgrounds and the theories they subscribe to. Jason --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Everything List FAQ/Glossary/Wiki
On Feb 9, 7:59 am, John M [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jason, the site is great, maybe greater than I can realize today. I, as a practical computer illiterate, (never learned any computerese courses, not even from books) sat before it with awe, - admiring that it works! I might have missed it when I tried: I did not find a place to look up topics (as in an index) to read about - to my choice. Clivkably, or advised under what name to find it, not 'included' in some topic, but alphabetically. Search seemed to work like a computer: lookiong for 'exact format' only. Maybe this is too hard, however I trust your skills, professor. John, Thanks, I think too that the site will evolve into something great. You are right the search functionality of pages is lacking, however on the main page ( http://everythingwiki.gcn.cx/wiki/ ) I included a link to the listing of all pages ( http://everythingwiki.gcn.cx/wiki/index.php?title=Special:Allpages ). There is also a listing of Categories ( http://everythingwiki.gcn.cx/wiki/index.php?title=Special:Categories ) which I think might be what you are looking for. As long as people are good about placing articles into categories then the category system provides an effective organiziation for the site. Clicking any of those category links will automatically show all articles placed into that category. Articles can also belong to multiple categories. I think its up to all of us how useful the site becomes, if we make the most of all the features the wiki provides we should do pretty well. Regards, Jason --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Everything List FAQ/Glossary/Wiki
Jason, just about the technicalities: I tried the main page with 2-3 topics and the result was no such title. Categories I did not venture into, because to find the right wording/spelling requires familiarity in our lingo and I had in mind to educate the innocent(ignorant) by passers outside Brunoistic or Schmidthuberistic use of vocabulary (and myself also). Those 'blog=like' concentrates of one's positions on topics will be much better than the spread-and-cut remarks in reply-posts containing 6 - 3000 preliminary texts ea. While I find it useful to let the prerequisites run, it makes it difficult to concentrate on the issue on hand - way above. Or: vice versa. I think the use of this 'wiki' would reduce the redundancy and increase the reasonability of the list by knowing what we are talking about. (This last sentence refers to myself). I think what you started is of a huge benefit to all of us. John M On 2/9/07, Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 9, 7:59 am, John M [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jason, the site is great, maybe greater than I can realize today. I, as a practical computer illiterate, (never learned any computerese courses, not even from books) sat before it with awe, - admiring that it works! I might have missed it when I tried: I did not find a place to look up topics (as in an index) to read about - to my choice. Clivkably, or advised under what name to find it, not 'included' in some topic, but alphabetically. Search seemed to work like a computer: lookiong for 'exact format' only. Maybe this is too hard, however I trust your skills, professor. John, Thanks, I think too that the site will evolve into something great. You are right the search functionality of pages is lacking, however on the main page ( http://everythingwiki.gcn.cx/wiki/ ) I included a link to the listing of all pages ( http://everythingwiki.gcn.cx/wiki/index.php?title=Special:Allpages ). There is also a listing of Categories ( http://everythingwiki.gcn.cx/wiki/index.php?title=Special:Categories ) which I think might be what you are looking for. As long as people are good about placing articles into categories then the category system provides an effective organiziation for the site. Clicking any of those category links will automatically show all articles placed into that category. Articles can also belong to multiple categories. I think its up to all of us how useful the site becomes, if we make the most of all the features the wiki provides we should do pretty well. Regards, Jason --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Everything List FAQ/Glossary/Wiki
John M mentioned in a recent post that many on the Everything List may have conflicting or poor understandings of all the various terminology used on the list. Hal Ruhl brought up the fact that someone had previously tried to maintain an acronym list and FAQ for the Everything List. I thought that a wiki would suit this role rather nicely, and offered to set one up for the list. I've finished setting up the site and it is currently running on a webhost which I use and have much underutilized space on. The URL is: http://everythingwiki.gcn.cx/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page I envision the wiki being used to explain the various concepts, acronyms, and theories so often mentioned on this list. Every account created on the wiki has its own dedicated page, which I think would be an ideal place for people to describe their backgrounds and the theories they subscribe to. Jason --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Everything List FAQ/Glossary/Wiki
John M mentioned in a recent post that many on the Everything List may have conflicting or poor understandings of all the various terminology used on the list. Hal Ruhl brought up the fact that someone had previously tried to maintain an acronym list and FAQ for the Everything List. I thought that a wiki would suit this role rather nicely, and offered to set one up for the list. I've finished setting up the site and it is currently running on a webhost which I use and have much underutilized space on. The URL is: http://everythingwiki.gcn.cx/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page I envision the wiki being used to explain the various concepts, acronyms, and theories so often mentioned on this list. Every account created on the wiki has its own dedicated page, which I think would be an ideal place for people to describe their backgrounds and the theories they subscribe to. Jason --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Is there a FAQ for this stuff?
At 18:00 +0100 9/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [Gordon]Back to your Philosophy, but hold on you are say that counting the shadow Quanta just like a child would with blocks or really Quanta,henc implies a system Context it may be number theory but without the shapes or forms it not! This leads to the most interesting question: what is geometry? A lot of people, like Lucien Hardy or Russell Standish try to derive QM from basic assumptions but most such attempts take some geometry for granted. In some sense Descartes tried to make arithmetical foundation for geometry and this has lead to the well known coordinate systems, and then physics look like finding invariant for coordinate systems changes... Coordinates give indeed number-representations of things, but we better should not take those things for granted. In any case the comp hypothesis forces us to generalise Klein program for geometry (reducing it to symmetry (group) theory), making the logical structure of reality invariant for any change of point of view ... With comp the UDA shows we must go from number to consistent comp histories then measure (and statistic on those histories, and only then we can hope to find a way toward ... What? commutative geometry above our common level of substitution, non commutative below. I bet. [Gordon] Nonideal Measurments, we have to see more of what is going on in Real experiments and not go back to Hilbert space it too limiting. You cannot be serious. Most quantum weirdness can be described with two dimensional real vector space and their products. Perhaps you are dreaming about building a non abelian anyonic quantum computing machine through some fractional quantum Hall effect? This is less elementary. At 17:54 +0100 9/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [Gordon] The point is that both our view cant be proved however within mine we have discovered new things and within the Nonrealtiy view we have just gone round in circle not getting any where. Hold on I feel myself belonging to the Reality view as you know. I do indeed not quite belong to the Physical Reality view cause I think Physical and Psychological are two internal views of number theoretical truth. That does not mean I don't believe in the physical laws, it means only that I don't believe physical laws are necessarily the fundamental laws. I don't use QT at all in my approach to the origin of the physical laws. That would make the approach circular. [Gordon]So why are you try to explain QT have I missed somthing??? I showed comp force us to derive (aspect of) the laws of physics from a measure on the consistent machine dreams. I should get QT from the other side. I find indeed firstly the many worlds, then, thanks to the consistency requirement a sort of abstract geometry appears and I compare it with the quantum for just verifying comp, or perhaps measuring some sort of local degree of falsity of comp, who knows? Even if Freedman or Calude are right and that it exists some analogical quantum universal machine that would not entail the falsity of comp. Only if we find evidence that we are ourself such analogical universal machine then comp would be false. I would not bet on that ... today. [Gordon] I never said there was what I am saying is that you have dismiss your own mixed up version of these theories without really looking into them and assumed that the early pioneers where totally right about there Myth work and you took of from there,and by Adding comp to this made it in your mind sound more solid.If you really want to go into Psyhco-Mind said of things then read Piaget or Sensory loss.It a narrow view you take becuase it reject all other explaination of other field in Nature and believe that there is nothing but Comp yet does not explain what that really means without a Context??? I read Piaget and Oliver Sacks too. It is interesting and inspiring but remember I talk on the psychology of the sound universal machine. Actually I just interview such machine (thanks to Solovay) *about* those different possible (consistent) points of view. [Gordon]I guess that Einstein would have had them odds when he was 19 but that did stop him like the others,same for Godel.Bohm and Deutsch are also whtin a msall group but it growning, most of the sheep follow the herd now and again some one comes along to shake ther world up.Most Math guy's also may not follow you either does that mean your wrong of course not stick to your guns even if I think your wrong :) Take care Y're worrying me. Is it the wrong century or what!?! At 17:40 +0100 9/05/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: Gordon wrote: Machine implies a Physical context does it not? Not at all. With the arithmetical realist assumption, machine can be reduced to relations between numbers. Remember that I show how the physical emerges from the arithmetical. Ok but how do you form this numbers and there relation from as a Human that
Re: A FAQ for the list
Hi George: That is something along the lines of what I was looking for. One problem with my current effort is the length of time for me to become sufficiently familiar with alternate threads as I called them to be able to fairly represent them in a FAQ . My suggestion is that we cooperate as the first two to participate. I can work on mine and you on yours. We compare efforts until we are satisfied that our respective contributions meet some minimal useful standard. We then mutually post the combined result to our web sites. In the meantime I am going to continue work on the list of acronyms etc in my current effort. Hal At 3/21/01, you wrote: Hi Hal The purpose of my post of september 99 was to clarify some of these issues and terminologies. I am still not an expert except for my own position... I certainly could not speak for others. A possible method for performing the tasks I outlined below may be to decentralized them... In effect assign each one of us to present in his own web page the documents I have outlined below...and simultaneously have each web page linked to the other ones... thus providing the appearance of a coordinated system. If somehow, we could use the same presentation software, then the ensemble would really look like a single system. Each site could even include an index for the whole system as well as a section for the owner of the site where he could expound his own TOE. This approach has the advantage of being absolutely egalitarian as well as of providing each author with the appropriate credit and blame. This approach leaves many questions open such as who will be the administrator of the network... could there be no administrator, with all decisions based on a democratic process? George
Re: A FAQ for the list
Hi Hal The purpose of my post of september 99 was to clarify some of these issues and terminologies. I am still not an expert except for my own position... I certainly could not speak for others. A possible method for performing the tasks I outlined below may be to decentralized them... In effect assign each one of us to present in his own web page the documents I have outlined below...and simultaneously have each web page linked to the other ones... thus providing the appearance of a coordinated system. If somehow, we could use the same presentation software, then the ensemble would really look like a single system. Each site could even include an index for the whole system as well as a section for the owner of the site where he could expound his own TOE. This approach has the advantage of being absolutely egalitarian as well as of providing each author with the appropriate credit and blame. This approach leaves many questions open such as who will be the administrator of the network... could there be no administrator, with all decisions based on a democratic process? George Hal Ruhl wrote: Dear George: Back in Sept of 99 as part of a post you said: --- There is a need for the following: 1) An index of acronyms and ideas such as ASSA, RSSA, COMP, COMP2, observer-moments and the published ones such as QS, MWI etc.. 2) Short definitions of these ideas with the author or champion of these ideas maintaining such definitions. 3) Posting a set of FAQs related to each idea 4) A (preferably short) paragraph *for* the idea written by one or several champions 5) A (preferably short) paragraph *against* the idea written by one or several challengers. 6) A (preferably short) rebuttal paragraph by the champion 7) A (preferably short) rebuttal paragraph by the challenger 8) A list of references such as the obvious articles by Tegmark and the book by Deutsch with short synopsis (couple of lines) of what these references are about. The first step is to compile the index, and have volunteer to champion them. Any suggestions regarding the mechanization of such scheme? It will make it much easier to argue about positions when we understand exactly where we stand and where the other participants stand. This would avoid a lot of repetition and needless arguing. - Is there any chance you might be willing to help me on the FAQ project I started? Yours Hal
The FAQ re the White Rabbit Conjecture
I have posted a new very early draft of the FAQ. at http://www.connix.com/~hjr/everythinglistFAQ.html This is proving an interesting project. Could someone provide applicable info on the White Rabbit Conjecture? It was introduced at post http://www.escribe.com/science/theory/m495.html but the links no longer work. Also could someone provide a short history of the list for the FAQ? Thanks Hal
Re: The FAQ re the White Rabbit Conjecture
I thought I summarised the situation fairly nicely in section 3 of my Occam paper. You're welcome to copy chunks out of the paper as appropriate. Of course Bruno has a blurb on it in his CCR paper. Cheers Hal Ruhl wrote: I have posted a new very early draft of the FAQ. at http://www.connix.com/~hjr/everythinglistFAQ.html This is proving an interesting project. Could someone provide applicable info on the White Rabbit Conjecture? It was introduced at post http://www.escribe.com/science/theory/m495.html but the links no longer work. Also could someone provide a short history of the list for the FAQ? Thanks Hal Dr. Russell Standish Director High Performance Computing Support Unit, Phone 9385 6967 UNSW SYDNEY 2052 Fax 9385 6965 Australia[EMAIL PROTECTED] Room 2075, Red Centrehttp://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
Re: A FAQ document proposal for this list
Dear Bruno: Yes I do know the Everett FAQ. In the scheme I am considering for my efforts for this list we could try to maintain and map the dialog by having alternate responses to the questions. Each question would have an index such as Q11 and the responses would have an index such as R11a, R11b, etc. Further all alternate responses with the same index suffix would be from the same model thread. The various thread suffixes would not be meant to imply a relative ranking for the associated model. Interestingly enough some of the questions I have listed so far have given me food for thought in my own model. I am going to start by filling in responses to the questions based on my own model and to avoid any hint of rank I am going to initially assign them response index suffix e. Hal At , you wrote: Very nice. I think it can be useful indeed. I guess you know the Everett FAQ at http://www.hedweb.com/manworld.htm It is an exemple of an excellent FAQ (IMO). We can use it as a source of inspiration. Bruno
Re: A FAQ document proposal for this list
Very nice. I think it can be useful indeed. I guess you know the Everett FAQ at http://www.hedweb.com/manworld.htm It is an exemple of an excellent FAQ (IMO). We can use it as a source of inspiration. Bruno --- original message by Hal Ruhl --- Dear Bruno: Thank you. I am sure it is a long term project. I think it will be some fun for me and can potentially add fun to the list. I think this list has substantial potential for producing a real increase in understanding of physics and thus aid the study of socioeconomic systems which is where I started so many years ago. Thus my interest in producing a map and measure of any progress that has been or may be made. Hal
Re: A FAQ document proposal for this list
Dear Bruno: Thank you. I am sure it is a long term project. I think it will be some fun for me and can potentially add fun to the list. I think this list has substantial potential for producing a real increase in understanding of physics and thus aid the study of socioeconomic systems which is where I started so many years ago. Thus my interest in producing a map and measure of any progress that has been or may be made. Hal
Re: A FAQ document proposal for this list
Hi Wei Dai, It's not possible to do that through the escribe.com interface as far as I know. However I have an archive of the list in Unix mailbox format, which you might be able to import into your email software and print from there. Or, since it's a text format you can print it directly if you don't mind getting a lot of email headers. I've uploaded the mailbox format archive to http://www.ibiblio.org/weidai/everything-archive. Thank you. This is very useful for printing parts. Regards, Bruno
Re: A FAQ document proposal for this list
Well here is a first try with some proposed questions for the FAQ list: I have filled in some responses here and there to illustrate the ideas of individualized and multiple responses. This allows the dialog to be sustained but hopefully eventually coalesce Thank you Hal. Now you give us a lot of questions! I will begin to think about the first one: What are the goals of the Everything TOE effort? Well perhaps the goal is just having some fun together :) As you know this list is very rich, and the archive is pretty big. There are different tendencies, and even different methologies like: poetry, informal reasoning, more formal reasoning (or pointing to relevant papers, etc.). So, IMO, an everything FAQ is a long term project. BTW does someone know how to print automatically some part of the archive (from one date to another, or just one thread ...). Is that possible ? Bruno
Re: A FAQ document proposal for this list
Dear Bruno: OK - I will try your approach. At first I had felt that one could not mount much of a disagreement over whether or not a given word could be found in the archive. However, I now think it better to bite the bullet and go directly to a list of questions. Given the nature of the list I think any reasonably written answer to a given accepted question should be posted regardless of how many individuals initially think it is or is not a reasonable answer. The poster could then remove his answer if he later accepts another posted answer. This may aid the emergence of at least some answers that are accepted by the majority. I also think we should find a place to post questions that are not given general acceptance. This could help prevent the process from having a premature narrowing. I will try to post my own initial offerings in a day or so. Hal At , you wrote: Better: do a list of questions (of the faQ) before. Send it to the everything-list. We will see if we agree on the questions, and perhaps on the answers. That could help us agreeing on our disagreement ... It is of course quite to much early for a definitive evrything-FAQ, if ever that could appear. Remember that what is nice in this list, are our very discrepancies and the fact we continue to argue. Bruno
Re: A FAQ document proposal for this list
Reçu le :14/02/2001 11:29 Expéditeur : Hal Ruhl, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hal Ruhl wrote: Adressé à : [EMAIL PROTECTED] I am going to start this [FAQ] project: What I am going to do first is create a list of archive search keys. Each of these will be a word or phrase such as consciousness or describe or compute. Given with each such search key will be a brief description of the various lines of thought associated with the key. After this I will add a list of additional reading with each key if available. While I will start this on my own I hereby solicit keys, brief descriptions, and reading lists which I will collate and post. I will for the time being post this at: http://www.connix.com/~hjr/everythinglistFAQ.html Better: do a list of questions (of the faQ) before. Send it to the everything-list. We will see if we agree on the questions, and perhaps on the answers. That could help us agreeing on our disagreement ... It is of course quite to much early for a definitive evrything-FAQ, if ever that could appear. Remember that what is nice in this list, are our very discrepancies and the fact we continue to argue. Bruno
Re: A FAQ document proposal for this list
I am going to start this project: What I am going to do first is create a list of archive search keys. Each of these will be a word or phrase such as consciousness or describe or compute. Given with each such search key will be a brief description of the various lines of thought associated with the key. After this I will add a list of additional reading with each key if available. While I will start this on my own I hereby solicit keys, brief descriptions, and reading lists which I will collate and post. I will for the time being post this at: http://www.connix.com/~hjr/everythinglistFAQ.html Hal
Re: A FAQ document proposal for this list
Sure. I think someone may have even started this. Cheers Hal Ruhl wrote: Since Jan 1998 when the archive date list starts there have been about 2440 postings. There are numerous distinct lines of thought as to the nature and dynamic of the Everything in the postings. I am interested in seeing these lines of thought arranged into a more concise library than the archive itself. I am willing to start work on such a document and keep it posted on my web site. I could of course use some help. Is there any interest in such a project? Hal Dr. Russell Standish Director High Performance Computing Support Unit, Phone 9385 6967 UNSW SYDNEY 2052 Fax 9385 6965 Australia[EMAIL PROTECTED] Room 2075, Red Centrehttp://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
A FAQ document proposal for this list
Since Jan 1998 when the archive date list starts there have been about 2440 postings. There are numerous distinct lines of thought as to the nature and dynamic of the Everything in the postings. I am interested in seeing these lines of thought arranged into a more concise library than the archive itself. I am willing to start work on such a document and keep it posted on my web site. I could of course use some help. Is there any interest in such a project? Hal
