Well, my idea of the universe is my own devising, but perhaps I was influenced by Raelism at a young age without knowing it. I believe my rejection of the axiom of a point is one of my key thoughts. It takes down most of science rather handily. Yes, I did accept a lot of axioms when I was young, but now I challenge them. Do you have some bad axioms I should reject, and the reasons behind them?
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 6:27 PM, John Pratt <[email protected]> wrote: > > I see. So you let other people think for you. > > > On Dec 29, 2012, at 4:23 PM, John Carlson wrote: > > John, check out Munchhausen's Trilemma > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnchhausen_trilemma as to why belief > systems as are they are. Everyone has a belief system, including > scientists, engineers,and mathematicians. Nothing is firm, including Falun > Dafa. Enjoy the mystery of everything, including math, science and > engineering. > > > On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 6:05 PM, John Pratt <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> "Science cannot believe X because scientific theorem A1 says..." >> >> Here is what I know: the theorem of atoms was ascertained without >> Godel. It was done in ancient Greece. >> >> >> >> On Dec 29, 2012, at 4:03 PM, John Carlson wrote: >> >> John, >> >> The FONC grant is done. Let it be. Please leave your email behavior at >> the door. As to why science cannot believe in such things is because of >> Godel's Incompleteness Theorems. Science doesn't have an axiom for it like >> it does for a point (in math). >> >> Find the most succinct axiom you can find, and bring it to us. Here are >> two that could be improved: >> >> Something doesn't come from nothing. >> Complexity doesn't increase. >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 5:33 PM, John Pratt <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> These are larger issues, rarely brought up anywhere except in >>> places where people don't counter the mainstream. How is it >>> that FONC needs to exist? Because people don't consider things >>> like this. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Dec 29, 2012, at 3:27 PM, David Leibs wrote: >>> >>> Are you sure you don't want a response from me? Are you trying to put >>> Alan in a petri dish? >>> -David Leibs >>> >>> On Dec 29, 2012, at 3:23 PM, John Pratt <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> I want a response from Alan Kay on this thread. Then I will leave you >>> all alone. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Dec 29, 2012, at 3:16 PM, David Harris wrote: >>> >>> What are you on about? How is this related to FONC? >>> >>> David >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 3:10 PM, John Pratt <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> What sickness science brings to everyday people! They cannot even >>>> believe in mysterious things, such as the divine, without first thinking it >>>> has to show up on a laboratory microscope. >>>> >>>> The petri dish has to exist before the thing will be acknowledged as >>>> fitting inside a petri dish. >>>> >>>> "We don't have a petri dish for that. It cannot exist. I cannot study >>>> it inside of its petri dish." >>>> >>>> "Tell me where its petri dish is first, then I will believe you and we >>>> will go study it." >>>> >>>> Mystical things of the past are regarded as superstition, described in >>>> terms of theoretical, mechanical concepts. Automobiles, air planes, and >>>> light rail trains are the indicators of supreme accomplishments given to >>>> man by this modern science. >>>> >>>> Computers, electronics are never questioned for what they are >>>> underneath-- a huge mess of chemical circuits. Contemptible expediency in >>>> its approach to making its own version of warped plastic and silicon >>>> clockwork. >>>> >>>> Cram as much as you invent into the smallest space possible, sheath it >>>> with cosmetic jewelry cases, and sell it to the world, telling the world it >>>> is pure jewelry, inside and out. When it happens to hit the floor, the lie >>>> is exposed-- a mess of soldering, wires, and toxic chemicals. >>>> >>>> Dazzling athletics, to cram this inelegant approach to match the >>>> world's demand for novelty and excitement. >>>> >>>> Pack it all into a tiny package. Call it sheer wizardry and a triumph >>>> of modern science. Its engineers confounded by accusations of philistine >>>> circuitry-- "engineering, math, and science works! our engineering campus >>>> buildings are not ugly-- they are utilitarian! I like math and was good at >>>> it in high school." >>>> >>>> If the shoe fits, wear it regardless of whether the shoe is distasteful >>>> in appearance on the outside. Make a distasteful shoe, cover it up with a >>>> cosmetic shell. Where there is a problem, an engineer will solve it. Make >>>> sure that you don't need a solution you want to know about, however. Just >>>> be content that a problem was solved and look the other way when the >>>> details are explained of its operation. >>>> >>>> "That'll do the trick." >>>> >>>> I didn't like parabolas because the world cannot be reduced to two, >>>> three, or four axes, thank you very much. >>>> >>>> I don't like polynomials because I want to draw the line before I call >>>> it a function of the world, saying that the world consists only of >>>> deterministic, reductionist functions. "Oh, then you are just tired of >>>> 'discreteness' and you need its polar opposite of discreteness, >>>> non-discreteness." >>>> >>>> Such is mathematics and science today. "Why does no one want to learn >>>> math and science anymore??" >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> fonc mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> fonc mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> fonc mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> fonc mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> fonc mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> fonc mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> fonc mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc >> >> > _______________________________________________ > fonc mailing list > [email protected] > http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc > > > > _______________________________________________ > fonc mailing list > [email protected] > http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc > >
_______________________________________________ fonc mailing list [email protected] http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
