Yeah, but despite Chopra there was Linde is seems to be a reliable. physicist. Also, the dismissive crap performed by number crunchers, dismiss it because it merely offends their sense of...conventionality. Outside of Bruno, and Young, Standish, nobody else here is employed as an academician is there? Sagan, who gets quoted here, offered woo, in Cosmos, and basically. 40 years later what do we know of the universe (currently) save that is a great, expanse of gas, dust, bereft of other civilizations, that we can never, in principle ever reach via probes. I, for one, look for some sort of commercial...intellectual..technological...somehow, some way..ROI. We need a pay out, in some fashion.
-----Original Message----- From: Bruce Kellett <bhkellet...@gmail.com> To: everything-list <everything-list@googlegroups.com> Sent: Mon, Sep 16, 2019 10:23 pm Subject: Re: Sean Carroll: Universe a 'tiny sliver' of all there is On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 12:19 PM spudboy100 via Everything List <everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: Agnostic, Mind-Brain thing is good with me. According to a brief article, some theorists have mused about consciousness in the absence of matter. Check it out. It will either be a good laugh for you, but once in a while, the 'lofty' stuff works for me. As soon as the article mentioned Deepak Chopra I knew that we were deep into woo-woo territory.... Bruce From: Bruce Kellett <bhkellet...@gmail.com> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:39 AM spudboy100 via Everything List <everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: It would be (will be?) interesting when we achieve this. Serious, academic bench computer scientists are actively working on variations of machine intelligence to make this happen, money to be made. Are you stating that making a hyper-smart machine is impossible? No, I am agnostic about the possibility. Certainly I am not a Cartesian dualist -- mind-brain identity is the thing..... Bruce Are you a spiritualist? A Cartesian dualist imputing a magic substance? :-) From: Bruce Kellett <bhkellet...@gmail.com> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 6:44 AM spudboy100 via Everything List <everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: So, if we develop AI to come up with new, better, equations, this would be good with you, because, non-human? Perhaps he could usefully have added: "nor to be in perfect harmony with any humanly devised equation." Bruce Go for it, man! First develop your super-intelligent AI.......... And then see if the world conforms to its predictions...... Bruce -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLSR8NfcwfJ%2B%2BGxVWvg76%3Dy1%3DLq4pSkU_wn9CtD3XcV59A%40mail.gmail.com. -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/313961629.8410799.1568695261396%40mail.yahoo.com.
