On 02 Feb 2014, at 20:08, meekerdb wrote:
On 2/2/2014 2:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Dear John,
On 01 Feb 2014, at 23:29, John Mikes wrote:
Dear Bruno, allow me NOT to repeat the entire shabang with only
'interjecing' some remarks.
My main problem is the "theorem" ("theory, hypothesis" or call it
anyway you wish) of which - in my opinion - we
CANNOT know all the details EVER.
It is a bit fuzzy. I would like to say that I agree with this. But
that does not change the validity or non validity of a reasoning
made in that theoretical context.
But it shows why we place so much credence in a theory that makes a
surprising and correct prediction. It means the theory entails
details we hadn't thought of.
Which makes comp testable, as it explains all physical details. For
example Z1* gives all quantum tautologies, and normally it should
gives the entire (quantum) probability calculus.
Physical theories just failed on the mind-body issues, necessarily so
when comp is assumed.
Bruno
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
