Thanks Bruno!

Best,
Telmo.

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
> Hi Telmo,
>
> On 11 Jul 2017, at 10:26, Telmo Menezes wrote (to Brent):
>
>> Hi Brent,
>>
>> Which book by Vic would you recommend one to read first?
>
>
> I let Brent answer this, but I have to say that his book "A comprehensible
> cosmos" is *very* good. I enjoyed it a lot, and it shows that a lot of
> physics will be available from arithmetic and mechanism, and its quantum
> logic,  once we got the physical space structure (of course a very difficult
> task).
>
> His book "God the Failed Hypothesis" is cute, but is *very* naive on
> theology. I agree with all what he says, but I do not believe in his notion
> of God.
>
> I read only those two books by him.
>
> Best!
>
> Bruno
>
>
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Telmo.
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 5:22 AM, Brent Meeker <meeke...@verizon.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Interesting essay.  When I was helping edit Vic's books I made a similar
>>> argument too him - that the reason his Point-of-View-Invariance seemed so
>>> powerful in rederiving physics is that physicist were only interested in
>>> things that obeyed POVI.
>>>
>>> You wrote:
>>>
>>> Let us say we were interested in describing all phenomena in our
>>> universe.
>>> What type of mathematics would we need? How many axioms would be needed
>>> for
>>> mathematical structure to describe all the phenomena? Of course, it is
>>> hard
>>> to predict, but it is even harder not to speculate. One possible
>>> conclusion
>>> would be that if we look at the universe in totality and not bracket any
>>> subset of phenomena, the mathematics we would need would have no axioms
>>> at
>>> all. That is, the universe in totality is devoid of structure and needs
>>> no
>>> axioms to describe it. Total lawlessness! The mathematics are just plain
>>> sets without structure. This would finally eliminate all metaphysics when
>>> dealing with the laws of nature and mathematical structure. It is only
>>> the
>>> way we look at the universe that gives us the illusion of structure.
>>>
>>> I"m sure you're aware of Max Tegmark's "Mathematical Universe Hypothesis"
>>> in
>>> which all possible mathematical structures obtain in some universe; and
>>> his
>>> later restriction of this idea to the "Computable Universe Hypothesis" in
>>> which only Turing computable universes exist.   But you are probably not
>>> aware of the ideas of Bruno Marchal, a mathematical logician in Brussels.
>>> He has a much more worked out idea of reality based on the Universal
>>> Dovetailing computer which he combines with the assumption that
>>> consciousness is certain kind of information processing to conclude that
>>> the
>>> UD computation produces all experience and implies physics.  It seems
>>> like a
>>> crankish idea at first, but Bruno is a very nice and serious guy, not at
>>> all
>>> a crank (though I don't agree with all of his theories).   Here's his
>>> basic
>>> paper:
>>>
>>> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/publications/SANE2004MARCHALAbstract.html
>>> I know him from his posting on the Everything list;
>>> everything-list@googlegroups.com
>>>
>>> Brent
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7/10/2017 3:56 PM, Noson Yanofsky wrote:
>>>
>>> Thank you!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Vic Stenger’s books are always very interesting!!!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Attached is a paper on finding lawlessness.
>>>
>>> And here is a link to another paper that was just published:
>>>
>>> http://nautil.us/issue/49/the-absurd/chaos-makes-the-multiverse-unnecessary
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Please pass them on to whoever would be interested in them.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> All the best,
>>>
>>> Noson
>>>
>>> From: Brent Meeker [mailto:meeke...@verizon.net]
>>> Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 4:48 PM
>>> To: spinozalens via Free Thinkers Physics Discussion Group
>>> <atvoi...@googlegroups.com>; no...@sci.brooklyn.cuny.edu; Atvoid-2
>>> <atvoi...@googlegroups.com>
>>> Subject: Re: Lawrence Krauss Should Have Paid Attention to Vic
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It's gratifying to see Vic's contribution to the philosophy of science
>>> recognized.  I think it's important to recognize though that mathematics
>>> is
>>> not "effective" in weeding out false physics theories.  Intelligence has
>>> evolutionary advantage insofar as it is good at prediction; which is
>>> implicitly projection of regularities into the future.  So humans have a
>>> built-in tendency to see patterns - even where they are specious.  They
>>> can
>>> build mathematical theories which don't have any reference reality, just
>>> as
>>> they can invent superstitions about physical events.
>>>
>>> Anyway, thanks to Prof Yanofsky.
>>>
>>> Brent
>>>
>>> On 7/10/2017 8:14 AM, spinozalens via Free Thinkers Physics Discussion
>>> Group
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> In Marcus Chown's delightful book " The Never Ending Days of Being Dead"
>>> a
>>> whole chapter ( Patterns in the Void)  is devoted to Vic's ideas " Where
>>> The
>>> Laws Of Physics Comes From" Chown used good judgement including this
>>> chapter
>>> in his book.  I  think that had Lawrence Krauss been more familiar with
>>> Vic's work , he possibly wouldn't have walked in the minefield he did
>>> with
>>> his book. "A Universe From Nothing"  In my opinion Vic had a very good
>>> answer to this question. This answer has not received enough attention in
>>> the physics and philosophy communities. Here mathematician Noson S
>>> Yanofky
>>> fleshes out these ideas in more detail.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bob Zannelli
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Why Mathematics Works So Well
>>>
>>> Noson S. Yanofsky
>>>
>>> (Submitted on 28 Jun 2015)
>>>
>>> A major question in philosophy of science involves the unreasonable
>>> effectiveness of mathematics in physics. Why should mathematics, created
>>> or
>>> discovered, with nothing empirical in mind be so perfectly suited to
>>> describe the laws of the physical universe? We review the well-known fact
>>> that the symmetries of the laws of physics are their defining properties.
>>> We
>>> show that there are similar symmetries of mathematical facts and that
>>> these
>>> symmetries are the defining properties of mathematics. By examining the
>>> symmetries of physics and mathematics, we show that the effectiveness is
>>> actually quite reasonable. In essence, we show that the regularities of
>>> physics are a subset of the regularities of mathematics.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> https://arxiv.org/abs/1506.08426
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>> "Free Thinkers Physics Discussion Group" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>>> email to atvoid-2+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To post to this group, send email to atvoi...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/atvoid-2/15d2d10eb24-2482-168e1%40webprd-m23.mail.aol.com.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
> 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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to