Re: [Fis] FIS Discussion (No Vol #)

2016-05-02 Thread Alex Hankey
Dear Bruno, You have brought up a vitally important question. Thank you so very much. Best wishes Alex RE Bruno: How could the quantum correlations existence be definite if nothing is objective? ME: It does not really matter what the nature of the reality is, either strongly objective (denied

Re: [Fis] FIS Discussion (No Vol #)

2016-05-02 Thread Alex Hankey
RE Bruno Marchal: Gödel's theorem implies that machines which are looking at themselves (in a precise technical sense) develop a series of distinct phenomenologies (arguably corresponding to justifiable, knowable, observable, sensible). ME: I find this a fascinating observation in that you are

Re: [Fis] FIS Discussion (No Vol #)

2016-05-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 02 May 2016, at 03:38, Maxine Sheets-Johnstone wrote: To all concerned colleagues, I appreciate the fact that discussions should be conversations about issues, but this particular issue and in particular the critique cited in my posting warrant extended exposition in order to show the

Re: [Fis] FIS Discussion (No Vol #)

2016-05-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Alex, On 02 May 2016, at 08:30, Alex Hankey wrote: RE Bruno Marchal: It is easier to explain the illusion of matter to something conscious than to explain the illusion of consciousness to something material. ME: At the Consciousness Conference I found it extraordinary that at least