Sungchul,
I lack the background in math and physics and other sciences to make any
serious assessment of your conjectures about the recurrence of
Planck-like distributions in various fields. From what I've read or
skimmed over the years, I'd say that most likenesses among distributions
turn
On Oct 3, 2014, at 5:41 AM, Sungchul Ji s...@rci.rutgers.edu wrote:
This conclusion seems consistent with the postulate I proposed in 2012
that the wave-particle complementarity operates not only in physics, but
also in biology and semiotics (see Table 2.13 in the chapter entitled
On Oct 1, 2014, at 3:00 PM, Howard Pattee hpat...@roadrunner.com wrote:
On Oct 1, 2014, at 4:00 AM, John Collier wrote:
I think that it is a given that for any realist position there is a
nominalist position in the contemporary sense that can fit the same assent
structure. Typically
Clark, list,
Maybe I've underestimated the amount of instrumentalism - it's hard for
me to discern how seriously people take their own ideas of 'useful
fictions' in practice. Often enough the phrase 'useful fiction' seems a
cynical or self-deprecating way to say enlightening approximation.
On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:50 AM, Benjamin Udell bud...@nyc.rr.com wrote:
Maybe I've underestimated the amount of instrumentalism - it's hard for me to
discern how seriously people take their own ideas of 'useful fictions' in
practice.
And I should add my own important caveat. I’m simply not
(Changed title to distinguish it from Natural Propositions thread and to match
my previously renamed posts)
On Oct 1, 2014, at 4:00 AM, John Collier colli...@ukzn.ac.za wrote:
The more contemporary nominalism is based in a view of language and thought
(which is understood on a linguistic
On Oct 1, 2014, at 4:00 AM, John Collier wrote:
I think that it is a given that for any realist position there is a
nominalist position in the contemporary sense that can fit the same
assent structure. Typically one is realist about some things, but
not others (for example one can be a
(Changed the thread title since we’ve drifted far from natural propositions)
On Sep 30, 2014, at 11:58 AM, Benjamin Udell bud...@nyc.rr.com
mailto:bud...@nyc.rr.com wrote:
[CG] Whether the “nearly real” is good enough is a reasonable question.
Like you, I see it as good enough, but I
