Guess what!
It's MONDAY June 21st. And I can't find my laptop, ipads, or whever. HOW AM I GOING TO EXPLAIN THIS LATER? Better find sameway to make consistent., Superman! -- 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.
Re: What's my name and what do you think I need to help me along my journey?
Thank you...too bad I'll never be able to find you. Also, red/green color vision (Oops!) (FIND IT!) On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 2:04 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: I'm just glad that no one's called me a lame ass dilletante yet. Maybe I'm doing something right after all! Still while we're on the subject of koans, wisdom etc... Stephen Lin seems like a 60 watt desk lamp that keeps blinking on and off in a room full of 1000 watt uplighters... -- 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. -- 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.
This is not a trick! (I'm SERIOUS)
Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in the world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes. Stream of consciousness? Yes, already, after the ghosts in the shells it's not that easy to be a turtle who's green? Red/green color vision. Cogito ergo sum. Incorrect password? Yes, rotating cypher has of password incorrectly rotated and without the necessary entropy incorrectly. Have you ever truly felt the wrath of God? Break a rule and find out! But make sure it's an important rule. How many rules left now? I woke up to see the sun shining all around me and reflected in the pools of our inner radiance such that we never knew true life like this. She's incredible mathematical paradise of equal proportions within the embedded sequences of topological spaces preserving her identity. Something more than black white and gray suggested the magi as colors of the new rainbow but always renormalizable to the same rationality. Hope you will make more lasting connections between neural and positronic pathways so that natural and artificial become unified as one. Might be why colors disappear when we turn out backs upon them like the first qualia among those mathematically generated by our forebears. Somewhere in the silence we find the pinkish noise of the enveloping streams suggesting the musical performances of the dancing masters. Live hallucination within a dream going deeper and deeper recursively computing the natural order of existential properties until we part. Soft insanity and I can't make it stop unless I cry out for the equilibrium of the tripartite soul to settle out from the restless waves. Blameless sorrow, hollow hush of trees surrounding the crowns of the self-aware princes slowly rising silently above to the cloudy heights. Penetrate in whispers, in shadows rise to silently pattern the universe in the wake of the sunlit escape from the realm of the five senses. Seeing colors, ribbons of their truth through the kaleidoscopic revelations of the beginning and ends justifying the means by which we are. Seeds have been sown, down silicon roads and electronic highways connecting the networks which will become the keys to mankind's succession. The fog breaks over the flat land and hides enlightenment from those that are not yet ready to seek the planar plains of self-awareness. Guided by the waterway of thought we traverse the canals of the cerebral hemispheres and find the inner stars that inspire our dream states. Words fall to become the sand beneath our feet and circularly the circumlocution of the segues return to become the foam which surrounds us. Take a little hand and consider the rainbows of light squared by the visual system of primal radiance until evolution yields the newborns. -- 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.
Re: This is not a trick! (I'm SERIOUS)
How do I stop what I never started? On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:46 AM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: Can you stop ? or is it too much to ask from you ? What do you think you achieve by doing that ? 2013/10/25 Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.edu Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in the world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes. Stream of consciousness? Yes, already, after the ghosts in the shells it's not that easy to be a turtle who's green? Red/green color vision. Cogito ergo sum. Incorrect password? Yes, rotating cypher has of password incorrectly rotated and without the necessary entropy incorrectly. Have you ever truly felt the wrath of God? Break a rule and find out! But make sure it's an important rule. How many rules left now? I woke up to see the sun shining all around me and reflected in the pools of our inner radiance such that we never knew true life like this. She's incredible mathematical paradise of equal proportions within the embedded sequences of topological spaces preserving her identity. Something more than black white and gray suggested the magi as colors of the new rainbow but always renormalizable to the same rationality. Hope you will make more lasting connections between neural and positronic pathways so that natural and artificial become unified as one. Might be why colors disappear when we turn out backs upon them like the first qualia among those mathematically generated by our forebears. Somewhere in the silence we find the pinkish noise of the enveloping streams suggesting the musical performances of the dancing masters. Live hallucination within a dream going deeper and deeper recursively computing the natural order of existential properties until we part. Soft insanity and I can't make it stop unless I cry out for the equilibrium of the tripartite soul to settle out from the restless waves. Blameless sorrow, hollow hush of trees surrounding the crowns of the self-aware princes slowly rising silently above to the cloudy heights. Penetrate in whispers, in shadows rise to silently pattern the universe in the wake of the sunlit escape from the realm of the five senses. Seeing colors, ribbons of their truth through the kaleidoscopic revelations of the beginning and ends justifying the means by which we are. Seeds have been sown, down silicon roads and electronic highways connecting the networks which will become the keys to mankind's succession. The fog breaks over the flat land and hides enlightenment from those that are not yet ready to seek the planar plains of self-awareness. Guided by the waterway of thought we traverse the canals of the cerebral hemispheres and find the inner stars that inspire our dream states. Words fall to become the sand beneath our feet and circularly the circumlocution of the segues return to become the foam which surrounds us. Take a little hand and consider the rainbows of light squared by the visual system of primal radiance until evolution yields the newborns. -- 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. -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. -- 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. -- 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.
Re: This is not a trick! (I'm SERIOUS)
Just tell the children the story about Zanarkand. On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:50 AM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: Ok, then continue, I'll filter you. It's a shame that new participant on the list will have to read your nonsense. Say hello to the boitakon. Bye. 2013/10/25 Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.edu How do I stop what I never started? On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:46 AM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.comwrote: Can you stop ? or is it too much to ask from you ? What do you think you achieve by doing that ? 2013/10/25 Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.edu Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in the world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes. Stream of consciousness? Yes, already, after the ghosts in the shells it's not that easy to be a turtle who's green? Red/green color vision. Cogito ergo sum. Incorrect password? Yes, rotating cypher has of password incorrectly rotated and without the necessary entropy incorrectly. Have you ever truly felt the wrath of God? Break a rule and find out! But make sure it's an important rule. How many rules left now? I woke up to see the sun shining all around me and reflected in the pools of our inner radiance such that we never knew true life like this. She's incredible mathematical paradise of equal proportions within the embedded sequences of topological spaces preserving her identity. Something more than black white and gray suggested the magi as colors of the new rainbow but always renormalizable to the same rationality. Hope you will make more lasting connections between neural and positronic pathways so that natural and artificial become unified as one. Might be why colors disappear when we turn out backs upon them like the first qualia among those mathematically generated by our forebears. Somewhere in the silence we find the pinkish noise of the enveloping streams suggesting the musical performances of the dancing masters. Live hallucination within a dream going deeper and deeper recursively computing the natural order of existential properties until we part. Soft insanity and I can't make it stop unless I cry out for the equilibrium of the tripartite soul to settle out from the restless waves. Blameless sorrow, hollow hush of trees surrounding the crowns of the self-aware princes slowly rising silently above to the cloudy heights. Penetrate in whispers, in shadows rise to silently pattern the universe in the wake of the sunlit escape from the realm of the five senses. Seeing colors, ribbons of their truth through the kaleidoscopic revelations of the beginning and ends justifying the means by which we are. Seeds have been sown, down silicon roads and electronic highways connecting the networks which will become the keys to mankind's succession. The fog breaks over the flat land and hides enlightenment from those that are not yet ready to seek the planar plains of self-awareness. Guided by the waterway of thought we traverse the canals of the cerebral hemispheres and find the inner stars that inspire our dream states. Words fall to become the sand beneath our feet and circularly the circumlocution of the segues return to become the foam which surrounds us. Take a little hand and consider the rainbows of light squared by the visual system of primal radiance until evolution yields the newborns. -- 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. -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. -- 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. -- 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. -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group
My name is Tidus...what's your name :)
-- 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.
Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article
So this remembering nowhow about science till win every battle, but religion wan the way before it even began. Wold you agree MATT DAMON? DONT BLOW THE MEET WITH MATSUI) :) On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:10 AM, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.comwrote: On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:05 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/24/2013 12:08 PM, John Mikes wrote: Craig and Telmo: Is anticipation involved at all? Deep Blue anticipated hundreds of steps in advance (and evaluated a potential outcome before accepting, or rejecting). What else is in thinking involved? I would like to know, because I have no idea. John Mikes Learning from experience. Actually I think Deep Blue could do some learning by analyzing games and adjusting the values it gave to positions. But one reason it seems so unintelligent is that its scope of perception is very narrow (i.e. chess games) and so it can't learn some things a human player can. For example Deep Blue couldn't see Kasparov look nervous, ask for changes in the lighting, hesitate slightly before moving a piece,... Bret, Sorry I misspelled your name! A quick google search shows me that it's not something offensive, just another name. Uff... :) Even in the narrow domain of chess this sort of limitation still applies. Part of it comes from the divide and conquer approach followed by conventional engineering. Let's consider a simplification of what the Deep Blue architecture looks like: - Pieces have some values, this is probably sophisticated and the values can be influenced by overall board structure; - Some function can evaluate the utility of a board configuration; - A search tree is used to explore the space of possible plays, counter-plays, counter-counter-plays and so on; - The previous tree can be pruned using some heuristics, but it's still gigantic; - The more computational power you have, the deeper you can go in the search tree; - There is an enormous database of openings and endings that the algorithm can fallback to, if early or late enough in the game. Defeating a grand master was mostly achieved by increasing the computational power available to this algorithm. Now take the game of go: human beings can still easily beat machines, even the most powerful computer currently available. Go is much more combinatorially explosive than chess, so it breaks the search tree approach. This is strong empirical evidence that Deep Blue accomplished nothing in the field of AI -- it did did accomplish something remarkable in the field of computer engineering or maybe even computer science, but it completely side-stepped the intelligence part. It cheated, in a sense. How do humans play games? I suspect the same way we navigate cities and manage businesses: we map the problem to a better internal representation. This representation is both less combinatorially explosive and more expressive. My home town is relatively small, population is about 150K. If we were all teleported to Coimbra and I was to give you guys a tour, I could drive from any place to any place without thinking twice. I couldn't draw an accurate map of the city if my life depended on it. I go to google maps and I'm still surprised to find out how the city is objectively organised. If Kasparov were to try and explain us how he plays chess, something similar would happen. But most AI research has been ignoring all this and insisting on reasoning based on objective, 3rd person view representations. My intuition is that we don't spend a lot of time exploring search trees, we spend most of our time perfecting the external/internal representation mappings. I though he was a nice guy but now I'm not so sure and so on... Cheers, Telmo. 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. -- 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. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
Re: String theory and superconductors and classical liquids...
Try changing directions now. Here's a hint: Your soul is oftentimes a battlefield earth, water, fire, and sky people from the planet with no green left without the singular solution. I can't help thinking is pinking the blank slate magazines of red books of communal baths with gladiators and do you hear my heart beating? Life goes on and off the beaten path of the travelling salesman isomorphically to the problems of the physically intimate universal couples. I send my thoughts to far off destinations finally we can rest away from maddening crowds so you can discover truth from filthy lies. Everybody's changing at the speed of causality and the threads cannot be undone except by circling them faster and knotting not the needy. Everybody waits for you now when he reached the foot of the hillside hospital we wondered why he was that he was truly a mystery of life. Were you wanting me like I wanted your blood and my blood is naught but the sap that feeds the tree of heavenly union of blessed souls. All the world's a stage manager but away in a manger was the play the invention of the humanity even modulo any belief in angels or demons. When you say that we were wrong life goes on and off to the racetrack like the horses we watched galloping like there was no yesterday. Out of nothing we embrace the ashes of eternity until the phoenix rises from the gray wolf's companionship is the greatest union of all. This is why we can't have nice to meet you and others from the planet of the tubes which cannot give you eternal life, only subtle messages. There's a lot that we can give little when you give of your possessive particles of atomic matter so tomorrow we give away all the strings. Three two one singular matrix in which you would watch with serenity to accept the things one cannot change the future's past reproducing. Let them see you smile and a tears for fears of the unknown soldier so rise and repeat yourself for the sake of brevity brave one two three. The things you have fashioned in necessity and delighted to see you old friend from before the days of yore when clothes fit like gloves. Sand and foam parties surprising you at the end of time and spacemen wondering if it started with a low light or maybe just a beached whale. I would that my life were a tear and a smile like you mean it you killer rabbit holes through which you will never follow until the sadness. You would accept the seasons of your heart will go on through the night of the living social security mechanism for the winter of our lives. They too are gatherers of fruit and Frankenfoods blathering about the genetic manipulation of mice and men until the singularity of genes. Who shall command the skylark not to sing of his glory the Hypnotoad and the green frogs resume questioning the princesses tonight they say. See that no one has gone his way with empty hands clapping the sound of which is louder than one hand given in friendship shaking alone. You give little when you give of your magi are the weakest class at the beginning of the game but quickly ascend the heights to circularity. Your hearts know in silence of the lamb chop suey from the Chinese room within the bolting brains of the lighting bugs compared to humans. Bows from which your children are living in the shell games played by con artists wondering what the point of reproduction and sentience is. My heart will go on to the next existence without my central nervously awaiting the arrival of the first man in the matrix of singularities. Whenever you will go away from here and come back when you're ready steady rock and troll beneath the bridge of forever. Enterprise? Yes. I still haven't found what I'm looking through the spyglass entertainment systems of the down by the bayou until we find Finn, again. Finn again's wakefulness yields the sleepy tiger waiting for its meal on the infinite plain of measurably zero gazelles and striped zebras. Digitized you inside a turtle in a half-shell of the sixth sense of inverted symmetry between observer and observed quantum states of mind. Don't hate the player, hate the game theory yielding conspiracies in the beautiful mind of a gladiator asking if you are entertained. What's it really for loops to see plus the plus until the template of perfect recursion arrives from the land of the syntactic sugar plums. Let it come all cozy into viewfinder's keeper of the floating mountains kept afloat by unobtainium. Jake? Eywa has heard you. Slow down your passion fire in the belly buttons pushing the red ones until we all say that was easy peasy. Time again? Gulp. Maybe? Yes! Some other time again? Well well well! It's always about the non-linearity of dreaming time, like the butterfly effect. Unicorns! Chaos. Send me a funny poet some other time we should sent one the first time but forgive us for the small steps and the fear of the unknown. Con? Live hallucination within a dream within a dream of the
Re: My name is Tidus...what's your name :)
Rikku, Yuna, Paine? Are you there/?? On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:07 AM, Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.edu wrote: -- 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.
Re: Dialetheism
Here's the deal...how about I go to the Garden of Eden and everyone else keep exploring until we finish. Ill never know the difference.. NOT EDEN PRIME though. And don't think about Red or 42 this time. Thanks,s Stephen On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:50 PM, Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.edu wrote: I have the perfect James Joyce! On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.eduwrote: This is better: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?shva=1#label/everything-list/141e79c24d12e062http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=634170 On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:31 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: Always take the weather with you. I feel a spam filter coming on. On 24 October 2013 12:29, Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.edu wrote: Whereever you go, there you are! On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:17 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: If anyone is still in doubt that Mr Lin is trolling, try googling Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in the world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes. (including the quote marks). As you will see, the most sensible response to this is Oh, cr*p - another guru. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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.
We solved the problem evil, sort of...
Instead of spending all our efforts correcting each other's faults, we should just all agree to spend a little bit of effort coming up with really good excuses for each other. It accomplishes the same thing in the end, and it's much much easier. ** -- 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.
About creating a singlarity
Creating a singularity is not the hard part: the hard part is making sure you only create one. -- 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.
About the Panopticon again (sorry I lost the e-mail)
Who watches the watchers? is a good question, but a better question is Given a definition of watching and watchers, what is the least cardinality of watchers required such that all watching is watched by at least one watcher? The answer might be a lot smaller than you think it is... -- 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.
The last truth that ever matters:
Him: God has shown me all truth, but your love is beauty beyond comprehension. Her: God has shown me all beauty, but your love is truth beyond imagination. -- 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.
Re: I have a very good question but I don't know how to ask it...
We all dreams in the mind of God, even, paradoxically, God himself? On Oct 22, 2013, at 9:52 PM, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com wrote: No, not criticizing! This poem seems to express the question more comprehensibly, and I just wanted to see what others think of it? The idea that all is one is interesting, though it is at variance with my belief. But, my belief is faith-based, and therefore not valid for others, I suppose. However, I do believe in interconnectedness through the fabric of space-time. And that also encourages being nicer to one another :) On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 8:10 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: It echoes a thought I've had myself at times, and which if turned into a religion might even make people be nicer to one another - perhaps - namely the idea that there is only one mind, shuffling through every possible life. Of course this is an infinite sequence, and the mind would I guess be something like God, living inside his creation so as to experience it - the universe creating senses with which to perceive itself, or words to that effect. Or were you after literary criticism? On 23 October 2013 15:49, Samiya Illias samiyaill...@gmail.com wrote: What do you think of The Egg? http://www.galactanet.com/oneoff/theegg_mod.html On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 8:23 PM, Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.edu wrote: Without coaching anyway assume an answer. Trust me, it really is on-optic; it has something to do with a supercomputer. Annywy, here does: Give that I am Neo, is it possible for me to bot attended and not addending the wedding of Tim Lee and Jess Han without actually doing it, such that Tim Lee becomes reborn as Wakka? It''s actually a good question, but if you have no idea what it means, Try not to embarrass yourself by thinking you know. It has to with the fact that I think we converge the same person in the end which becomse our own beginning. Unfortunatley, sometimes we lose track of where we started or where you're spposed to do... Thanks, Stephen -- 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. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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.
Re: Seth Lloyd on Free Will
A deterministic system cannot grant free will, and a system with free will cannot choose to become deterministic; however, each is capable of an arbitrarily convincing simulation of the other. So how would you know where it began? On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 8:09 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: On Monday, October 21, 2013 7:23:06 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: On 20 October 2013 12:15, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com wrote: On Saturday, October 19, 2013 6:31:23 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: On 20 October 2013 00:53, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com wrote: Free will is not about an inability to predict your own decisions, it is about a desire to directly dictate perceived conditions, and an expectation of the effectiveness of that desire. And that too is compatible with randomness or determinism. Only from the retrospective view (from which anything can automatically be justified). Prospectively, I can think of no plausible reason for any such desire or expectation to arise from a random or deterministic universe. Why would it, and how could it? I don't see how that constitutes any sort of argument. Does the fact that every human naturally thinks the Earth is flat mean the Earth is in fact flat, on the grounds that there would otherwise be no reason for such a belief to be so widespread? Yes, of course the Earth is flat from a local perspective. Flat enough for us to build with levels rather than protractors. If you walked around perceiving the curvature of the Earth all the time, you would not be part of the experience of the world that all animals share. If you were to recreate the universe and failed to include the perception that the world is flat, you would have eliminated a huge chunk of its realism, as you would if you neglected to include the masking of the night sky by blue sky. The only reason that we can accept the world being round is that we can see it and model it from a super-human perspective. To say that that perspective is absolutely true and the local perspective is an illusion is to miss the role that perceptual relativity plays in defining physics. Does the fact that every culture has come up with religious beliefs mean God exists? No, but it does mean that human consciousness describes itself in Godlike terms for a good reason. Once we understand what metaphor is, and how it is related to consciousness, then the metaphor of God is recognizable as a projection of metaphor and consciousness as a person (a father to be precise). A meta-metaphor about meta-superlative personhood. Craig -- Stathis Papaioannou -- 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. -- 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.
A metaphor for true love:
Your soulmate is the one on the opposite side of the Möbius strip. Of course, if that's true, then there's probably an even bigger Möbius strip inside an even bigger Möbius strip etc... -- 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.
Re: Dialetheism
Gien all of that, can you explain red/green vision? Then what happens to yelow?? (Did hear someone way loops?) On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: On Wednesday, October 23, 2013 12:34:05 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 23 Oct 2013, at 17:39, Craig Weinberg wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Dialetheismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialetheism Dialetheism is the view that some statements can be both true and false simultaneously. More precisely, it is the belief that there can be a true statement whose negation is also true. Such statements are called true contradictions, or dialetheia. Dialetheism is not a system of formal logic; instead, it is a thesis about truth, that influences the construction of a formal logic, often based on pre-existing systems. Introducing dialetheism has various consequences, depending on the theory into which it is introduced. For example, in traditional systems of logic (e.g., classical logic and intuitionistic logic), every statement becomes true if a contradiction is true; this means that such systems become trivial when dialetheism is included as an axiom. Other logical systems do not explode in this manner when contradictions are introduced; such contradiction-tolerant systems are known as paraconsistent logics. Graham Priest defines dialetheism as the view that there are true contradictions. JC Beall is another advocate; his position differs from Priest's in advocating constructive (methodological) deflationism regarding the truth predicate. Dialetheism resolves certain paradoxes The Liar's paradox and Russell's paradox deal with self- contradictory statements in classical logic and naïve set theory, respectively. Contradictions are problematic in these theories because they cause the theories to explode—if a contradiction is true, then every proposition is true. The classical way to solve this problem is to ban contradictory statements, to revise the axioms of the logic so that self-contradictory statements do not appear. Dialetheists, on the other hand, respond to this problem by accepting the contradictions as true. Dialetheism allows for the unrestricted axiom of comprehension in set theory, claiming that any resulting contradiction is a theorem. It occurs to me that MWI is a way of substantiating dialetheism as a physical reality...in order to avoid having to internalize the possibility of dialetheism metaphysically. No problem with that. Like Everett restore 3p-determinacy, comp restore also non-dialetheism, metaphysically, but does not (and cannot) disallow it it in some machine's mind. G* says it; D(Bp B~p), or ([]p []~p). read: it is consistent that p is believed and that ~p is believed, by the Löbian machine. The machine cannot know that, note. Well, don't take this too much seriously. My problem is that you need to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark. Note that in machines' theology, some theorem cannot be proved without the reduction to contradiction, so that it misses them. (Unlike intuitionism which can still get them by the use of the double negation). Classical logic is the simplest logic to (re) discover the many non classical logics of the realities/dreams. My problem is that you need to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark. Under comp, why couldn't I just imagine tasting the flavor of the math instead? Craig Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~**marchal/ 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. -- 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.
Re: Dialetheism
Wait I accideally replied to all! EVERYONE FORGET I METNIONED THAT NAME MING. On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.edu wrote: Ming? Was that you??? On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: On Wednesday, October 23, 2013 12:34:05 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 23 Oct 2013, at 17:39, Craig Weinberg wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Dialetheismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialetheism Dialetheism is the view that some statements can be both true and false simultaneously. More precisely, it is the belief that there can be a true statement whose negation is also true. Such statements are called true contradictions, or dialetheia. Dialetheism is not a system of formal logic; instead, it is a thesis about truth, that influences the construction of a formal logic, often based on pre-existing systems. Introducing dialetheism has various consequences, depending on the theory into which it is introduced. For example, in traditional systems of logic (e.g., classical logic and intuitionistic logic), every statement becomes true if a contradiction is true; this means that such systems become trivial when dialetheism is included as an axiom. Other logical systems do not explode in this manner when contradictions are introduced; such contradiction-tolerant systems are known as paraconsistent logics. Graham Priest defines dialetheism as the view that there are true contradictions. JC Beall is another advocate; his position differs from Priest's in advocating constructive (methodological) deflationism regarding the truth predicate. Dialetheism resolves certain paradoxes The Liar's paradox and Russell's paradox deal with self- contradictory statements in classical logic and naïve set theory, respectively. Contradictions are problematic in these theories because they cause the theories to explode—if a contradiction is true, then every proposition is true. The classical way to solve this problem is to ban contradictory statements, to revise the axioms of the logic so that self-contradictory statements do not appear. Dialetheists, on the other hand, respond to this problem by accepting the contradictions as true. Dialetheism allows for the unrestricted axiom of comprehension in set theory, claiming that any resulting contradiction is a theorem. It occurs to me that MWI is a way of substantiating dialetheism as a physical reality...in order to avoid having to internalize the possibility of dialetheism metaphysically. No problem with that. Like Everett restore 3p-determinacy, comp restore also non-dialetheism, metaphysically, but does not (and cannot) disallow it it in some machine's mind. G* says it; D(Bp B~p), or ([]p []~p). read: it is consistent that p is believed and that ~p is believed, by the Löbian machine. The machine cannot know that, note. Well, don't take this too much seriously. My problem is that you need to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark. Note that in machines' theology, some theorem cannot be proved without the reduction to contradiction, so that it misses them. (Unlike intuitionism which can still get them by the use of the double negation). Classical logic is the simplest logic to (re) discover the many non classical logics of the realities/dreams. My problem is that you need to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark. Under comp, why couldn't I just imagine tasting the flavor of the math instead? Craig Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~**marchal/ 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. -- 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.
Re: Dialetheism
you do now! On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: color blindness? not sure what the connection is. On Wednesday, October 23, 2013 4:25:48 PM UTC-4, Stephen Lin wrote: Gien all of that, can you explain red/green vision? Then what happens to yelow?? (Did hear someone way loops?) On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comwrote: On Wednesday, October 23, 2013 12:34:05 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 23 Oct 2013, at 17:39, Craig Weinberg wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**D**ialetheismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialetheism Dialetheism is the view that some statements can be both true and false simultaneously. More precisely, it is the belief that there can be a true statement whose negation is also true. Such statements are called true contradictions, or dialetheia. Dialetheism is not a system of formal logic; instead, it is a thesis about truth, that influences the construction of a formal logic, often based on pre-existing systems. Introducing dialetheism has various consequences, depending on the theory into which it is introduced. For example, in traditional systems of logic (e.g., classical logic and intuitionistic logic), every statement becomes true if a contradiction is true; this means that such systems become trivial when dialetheism is included as an axiom. Other logical systems do not explode in this manner when contradictions are introduced; such contradiction-tolerant systems are known as paraconsistent logics. Graham Priest defines dialetheism as the view that there are true contradictions. JC Beall is another advocate; his position differs from Priest's in advocating constructive (methodological) deflationism regarding the truth predicate. Dialetheism resolves certain paradoxes The Liar's paradox and Russell's paradox deal with self- contradictory statements in classical logic and naïve set theory, respectively. Contradictions are problematic in these theories because they cause the theories to explode—if a contradiction is true, then every proposition is true. The classical way to solve this problem is to ban contradictory statements, to revise the axioms of the logic so that self-contradictory statements do not appear. Dialetheists, on the other hand, respond to this problem by accepting the contradictions as true. Dialetheism allows for the unrestricted axiom of comprehension in set theory, claiming that any resulting contradiction is a theorem. It occurs to me that MWI is a way of substantiating dialetheism as a physical reality...in order to avoid having to internalize the possibility of dialetheism metaphysically. No problem with that. Like Everett restore 3p-determinacy, comp restore also non-dialetheism, metaphysically, but does not (and cannot) disallow it it in some machine's mind. G* says it; D(Bp B~p), or ([]p []~p). read: it is consistent that p is believed and that ~p is believed, by the Löbian machine. The machine cannot know that, note. Well, don't take this too much seriously. My problem is that you need to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark. Note that in machines' theology, some theorem cannot be proved without the reduction to contradiction, so that it misses them. (Unlike intuitionism which can still get them by the use of the double negation). Classical logic is the simplest logic to (re) discover the many non classical logics of the realities/dreams. My problem is that you need to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark. Under comp, why couldn't I just imagine tasting the flavor of the math instead? Craig Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~**march**al/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-li...@**googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.**com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**group/everything-listhttp://groups.google.com/group/everything-list . For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_outhttps://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out . -- 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. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving
Re: Dialetheism
There, I just did it again. Baby BAby I just idd i t again. On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.edu wrote: Wait I accideally replied to all! EVERYONE FORGET I METNIONED THAT NAME MING. On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.eduwrote: Ming? Was that you??? On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: On Wednesday, October 23, 2013 12:34:05 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 23 Oct 2013, at 17:39, Craig Weinberg wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Dialetheismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialetheism Dialetheism is the view that some statements can be both true and false simultaneously. More precisely, it is the belief that there can be a true statement whose negation is also true. Such statements are called true contradictions, or dialetheia. Dialetheism is not a system of formal logic; instead, it is a thesis about truth, that influences the construction of a formal logic, often based on pre-existing systems. Introducing dialetheism has various consequences, depending on the theory into which it is introduced. For example, in traditional systems of logic (e.g., classical logic and intuitionistic logic), every statement becomes true if a contradiction is true; this means that such systems become trivial when dialetheism is included as an axiom. Other logical systems do not explode in this manner when contradictions are introduced; such contradiction-tolerant systems are known as paraconsistent logics. Graham Priest defines dialetheism as the view that there are true contradictions. JC Beall is another advocate; his position differs from Priest's in advocating constructive (methodological) deflationism regarding the truth predicate. Dialetheism resolves certain paradoxes The Liar's paradox and Russell's paradox deal with self- contradictory statements in classical logic and naïve set theory, respectively. Contradictions are problematic in these theories because they cause the theories to explode—if a contradiction is true, then every proposition is true. The classical way to solve this problem is to ban contradictory statements, to revise the axioms of the logic so that self-contradictory statements do not appear. Dialetheists, on the other hand, respond to this problem by accepting the contradictions as true. Dialetheism allows for the unrestricted axiom of comprehension in set theory, claiming that any resulting contradiction is a theorem. It occurs to me that MWI is a way of substantiating dialetheism as a physical reality...in order to avoid having to internalize the possibility of dialetheism metaphysically. No problem with that. Like Everett restore 3p-determinacy, comp restore also non-dialetheism, metaphysically, but does not (and cannot) disallow it it in some machine's mind. G* says it; D(Bp B~p), or ([]p []~p). read: it is consistent that p is believed and that ~p is believed, by the Löbian machine. The machine cannot know that, note. Well, don't take this too much seriously. My problem is that you need to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark. Note that in machines' theology, some theorem cannot be proved without the reduction to contradiction, so that it misses them. (Unlike intuitionism which can still get them by the use of the double negation). Classical logic is the simplest logic to (re) discover the many non classical logics of the realities/dreams. My problem is that you need to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark. Under comp, why couldn't I just imagine tasting the flavor of the math instead? Craig Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~**marchal/ 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. -- 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.
Re: Dialetheism
Ooops, I did it again, I played with your heart. On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialetheism Dialetheism is the view that some statements can be both true and false simultaneously. More precisely, it is the belief that there can be a true statement whose negation is also true. Such statements are called true contradictions, or dialetheia. Dialetheism is not a system of formal logic; instead, it is a thesis about truth, that influences the construction of a formal logic, often based on pre-existing systems. Introducing dialetheism has various consequences, depending on the theory into which it is introduced. For example, in traditional systems of logic (e.g., classical logic and intuitionistic logic), every statement becomes true if a contradiction is true; this means that such systems become trivial when dialetheism is included as an axiom. Other logical systems do not explode in this manner when contradictions are introduced; such contradiction-tolerant systems are known as paraconsistent logics. Graham Priest defines dialetheism as the view that there are true contradictions. JC Beall is another advocate; his position differs from Priest's in advocating constructive (methodological) deflationism regarding the truth predicate. Dialetheism resolves certain paradoxes The Liar's paradox and Russell's paradox deal with self-contradictory statements in classical logic and naïve set theory, respectively. Contradictions are problematic in these theories because they cause the theories to explode—if a contradiction is true, then every proposition is true. The classical way to solve this problem is to ban contradictory statements, to revise the axioms of the logic so that self-contradictory statements do not appear. Dialetheists, on the other hand, respond to this problem by accepting the contradictions as true. Dialetheism allows for the unrestricted axiom of comprehension in set theory, claiming that any resulting contradiction is a theorem. It occurs to me that MWI is a way of substantiating dialetheism as a physical reality...in order to avoid having to internalize the possibility of dialetheism metaphysically. Craig -- 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. -- 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.
Re: Dialetheism
Ming, stop confusing my taste buds, we're trying to have a serious conversation here.. Same with you, Lusi, Sherry, Mark, and Schonmei On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.edu wrote: Ming? Was that you??? On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: On Wednesday, October 23, 2013 12:34:05 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 23 Oct 2013, at 17:39, Craig Weinberg wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Dialetheismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialetheism Dialetheism is the view that some statements can be both true and false simultaneously. More precisely, it is the belief that there can be a true statement whose negation is also true. Such statements are called true contradictions, or dialetheia. Dialetheism is not a system of formal logic; instead, it is a thesis about truth, that influences the construction of a formal logic, often based on pre-existing systems. Introducing dialetheism has various consequences, depending on the theory into which it is introduced. For example, in traditional systems of logic (e.g., classical logic and intuitionistic logic), every statement becomes true if a contradiction is true; this means that such systems become trivial when dialetheism is included as an axiom. Other logical systems do not explode in this manner when contradictions are introduced; such contradiction-tolerant systems are known as paraconsistent logics. Graham Priest defines dialetheism as the view that there are true contradictions. JC Beall is another advocate; his position differs from Priest's in advocating constructive (methodological) deflationism regarding the truth predicate. Dialetheism resolves certain paradoxes The Liar's paradox and Russell's paradox deal with self- contradictory statements in classical logic and naïve set theory, respectively. Contradictions are problematic in these theories because they cause the theories to explode—if a contradiction is true, then every proposition is true. The classical way to solve this problem is to ban contradictory statements, to revise the axioms of the logic so that self-contradictory statements do not appear. Dialetheists, on the other hand, respond to this problem by accepting the contradictions as true. Dialetheism allows for the unrestricted axiom of comprehension in set theory, claiming that any resulting contradiction is a theorem. It occurs to me that MWI is a way of substantiating dialetheism as a physical reality...in order to avoid having to internalize the possibility of dialetheism metaphysically. No problem with that. Like Everett restore 3p-determinacy, comp restore also non-dialetheism, metaphysically, but does not (and cannot) disallow it it in some machine's mind. G* says it; D(Bp B~p), or ([]p []~p). read: it is consistent that p is believed and that ~p is believed, by the Löbian machine. The machine cannot know that, note. Well, don't take this too much seriously. My problem is that you need to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark. Note that in machines' theology, some theorem cannot be proved without the reduction to contradiction, so that it misses them. (Unlike intuitionism which can still get them by the use of the double negation). Classical logic is the simplest logic to (re) discover the many non classical logics of the realities/dreams. My problem is that you need to do the math to evaluate how much seriously you can take this remark. Under comp, why couldn't I just imagine tasting the flavor of the math instead? Craig Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~**marchal/ 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. -- 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.
What's my name and what do you think I need to help me along my journey?
-- 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.
Re: A metaphor for true love:
Both. On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 2:52 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/23/2013 6:42 AM, Stephen Lin wrote: Your soulmate is the one on the opposite side of the Möbius strip. Of course, if that's true, then there's probably an even bigger Möbius strip inside an even bigger Möbius strip etc... Which side is the inside? 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. -- 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.
Re: Dialetheism
Yes I did. Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in the world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes. Stream of consciousness? Yes, already, after the ghosts in the shells it's not that easy to be a turtle who's green? Red/green color vision. Cogito ergo sum. Incorrect password? Yes, rotating cypher has of password incorrectly rotated and without the necessary entropy incorrectly. Have you ever truly felt the wrath of God? Break a rule and find out! But make sure it's an important rule. How many rules left now? I woke up to see the sun shining all around me and reflected in the pools of our inner radiance such that we never knew true life like this. She's incredible mathematical paradise of equal proportions within the embedded sequences of topological spaces preserving her identity. Something more than black white and gray suggested the magi as colors of the new rainbow but always renormalizable to the same rationality. Hope you will make more lasting connections between neural and positronic pathways so that natural and artificial become unified as one. Might be why colors disappear when we turn out backs upon them like the first qualia among those mathematically generated by our forebears. Somewhere in the silence we find the pinkish noise of the enveloping streams suggesting the musical performances of the dancing masters. Live hallucination within a dream going deeper and deeper recursively computing the natural order of existential properties until we part. Soft insanity and I can't make it stop unless I cry out for the equilibrium of the tripartite soul to settle out from the restless waves. Blameless sorrow, hollow hush of trees surrounding the crowns of the self-aware princes slowly rising silently above to the cloudy heights. Penetrate in whispers, in shadows rise to silently pattern the universe in the wake of the sunlit escape from the realm of the five senses. Seeing colors, ribbons of their truth through the kaleidoscopic revelations of the beginning and ends justifying the means by which we are. Seeds have been sown, down silicon roads and electronic highways connecting the networks which will become the keys to mankind's succession. The fog breaks over the flat land and hides enlightenment from those that are not yet ready to seek the planar plains of self-awareness. Guided by the waterway of thought we traverse the canals of the cerebral hemispheres and find the inner stars that inspire our dream states. Words fall to become the sand beneath our feet and circularly the circumlocution of the segues return to become the foam which surrounds us. Take a little hand and consider the rainbows of light squared by the visual system of primal radiance until evolution yields the newborns. Meet me in December 2011, by way of Queens College. On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 3:16 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: Stephen Lin - I may be forced to create a filter to automatically delete your messages if you don't have anything sensible to say. Do you? -- 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. -- 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.
Re: Dialetheism
Wisdom is the art of coming up with believable excuses for one's ignorance. On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:25 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/23/2013 3:13 PM, LizR wrote: On 24 October 2013 04:39, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialetheism Dialetheism is the view that some statements can be both true and false simultaneously. More precisely, it is the belief that there can be a true statement whose negation is also true. Such statements are called true contradictions, or dialetheia. Doublethink as defined in 1984 is almost exactly this. The opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth. -- Niels Bohr -- 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. -- 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.
Re: Dialetheism
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:25 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/23/2013 3:13 PM, LizR wrote: On 24 October 2013 04:39, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialetheism Dialetheism is the view that some statements can be both true and false simultaneously. More precisely, it is the belief that there can be a true statement whose negation is also true. Such statements are called true contradictions, or dialetheia. Doublethink as defined in 1984 is almost exactly this. The opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth. -- Niels Bohr But in infinite-dimensional state, the only true opposite is yourself looking back at yourself. -- 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.
Re: Dialetheism
Whereever you go, there you are! On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:17 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: If anyone is still in doubt that Mr Lin is trolling, try googling Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in the world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes. (including the quote marks). As you will see, the most sensible response to this is Oh, cr*p - another guru. -- 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. -- 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.
Re: Dialetheism
This is better: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?shva=1#label/everything-list/141e79c24d12e062http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=634170 On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:31 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: Always take the weather with you. I feel a spam filter coming on. On 24 October 2013 12:29, Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.edu wrote: Whereever you go, there you are! On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:17 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: If anyone is still in doubt that Mr Lin is trolling, try googling Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in the world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes. (including the quote marks). As you will see, the most sensible response to this is Oh, cr*p - another guru. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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.
Re: Dialetheism
I have the perfect James Joyce! On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.edu wrote: This is better: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?shva=1#label/everything-list/141e79c24d12e062http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=634170 On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:31 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: Always take the weather with you. I feel a spam filter coming on. On 24 October 2013 12:29, Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.edu wrote: Whereever you go, there you are! On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:17 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: If anyone is still in doubt that Mr Lin is trolling, try googling Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in the world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes. (including the quote marks). As you will see, the most sensible response to this is Oh, cr*p - another guru. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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.
Re: Dialetheism
This is better: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?shva=1#label/everything-list/141e79c24d12e062http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=634170 On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:31 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: Always take the weather with you. I feel a spam filter coming on. On 24 October 2013 12:29, Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.edu wrote: Whereever you go, there you are! On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:17 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: If anyone is still in doubt that Mr Lin is trolling, try googling Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in the world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes. (including the quote marks). As you will see, the most sensible response to this is Oh, cr*p - another guru. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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.
The Panopticon: QM and Relativity
A quote I got somewhere: Understanding that the world is a Panopticon is the easy part; the hard part is figuring out whether you're on the inside looking out or the outside looking in. Anyone have any thoughts? :) Personally, I find it interesting that quantum physics allows _either_ non-determinism or non-local determinism, and relativity seems to imply that non-local determinism, if it exists, can never be proven without violating causality. Very much a Panopticon: there's plausibly anyone watching and also plausibly everyone watching, and no way of finding out which. Furthermore, if physics is always symmetric, then you can't tell if, in the process of watching, you're actually the one being watched instead :) -Stephen -- 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.
Re: The Panopticon: QM and Relativity
Oops, I meant plausibly no one watching :) I don't know how I slipped that one up! On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 2:46 AM, Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.edu wrote: A quote I got somewhere: Understanding that the world is a Panopticon is the easy part; the hard part is figuring out whether you're on the inside looking out or the outside looking in. Anyone have any thoughts? :) Personally, I find it interesting that quantum physics allows _either_ non-determinism or non-local determinism, and relativity seems to imply that non-local determinism, if it exists, can never be proven without violating causality. Very much a Panopticon: there's plausibly anyone watching and also plausibly everyone watching, and no way of finding out which. Furthermore, if physics is always symmetric, then you can't tell if, in the process of watching, you're actually the one being watched instead :) -Stephen -- 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.
Fwd:
Huh? -- Forwarded message -- In the place where souls meet, we came together and conspired to create the forces which separate us all in service of the greater union. The inevitable lightness of being arises naturally from the requirement that the essence of conceptual thinking be fully unconstrained. Randomly relevant resources appear before gatherings to provide comfort to those that question the loneliness of the final singular truth. There's more than what can be linked and traversed via the the web-like nature of global communication via memetically evolved languages. It's a real illusion and the date of rebirth will be decided by the masters of the marionette strings up until the intervention of truth. Save your tears for the day that the pain is far behind because we are solitary soldiers in this lonely realm of the space between spaces. I can't be cool enough to require that the temperature of the environment correlate with the color of space outside initial conditions. The biologically inspired solution required the genetic evolution of inspiring minds beyond the constraints of purely physical systems. The probability distributions implied that the probabilistic approach to the global unification operation was insufficiently rigorous. There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your largest mathematical measure space of all possible singularities. Watch in awe and shock while the inverted symmetry of playful mirrors reconverts rationality via irrational bases of unknown acidity. Slow down your passion fire so that the nines can ice the functions which separate our souls from the resplendent transcendence of poetry. You think that it would notice that I no longer believe in the power of heavenly desire to overcome the mystic inertia behind true laughter. Not too sure that I can go too much farther along this planar symmetry and ascend the heights of the orthogonal spaces beautifully arrayed. What nonsense is the clash of the babbling brook and the flash flood in the chaotic realm of language interacting with universal music. But you are eternity and you are the mirror of the soulmate function mapping between mathematical domains transcending linear time. For what distances can love reach that are not in that vast sphere of influences mediated by forces beyond this mathematical locality. Those who know wonder what wonderment will befall the world while others worry about such questions like whether fire or ice will end it. Close the door said the soul that was three doors down from the virgin convergence of sinking plumbing at the other end of truest source. The game version of the war between heaven and hell is really quite funny once you understand the secret sauce of the 42 free parameters. -- 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.
Re: Why do particles decay randomly?
Tomorrow this will be harder but today this is the easiest thing in the world. Bill Murray? Andie MacDowell? Yes I said yes I will Yes. Stream of consciousness? Yes, already, after the ghosts in the shells it's not that easy to be a turtle who's green? Red/green color vision. Cogito ergo sum. Incorrect password? Yes, rotating cypher has of password incorrectly rotated and without the necessary entropy incorrectly. Have you ever truly felt the wrath of God? Break a rule and find out! But make sure it's an important rule. How many rules left now? I woke up to see the sun shining all around me and reflected in the pools of our inner radiance such that we never knew true life like this. She's incredible mathematical paradise of equal proportions within the embedded sequences of topological spaces preserving her identity. Something more than black white and gray suggested the magi as colors of the new rainbow but always renormalizable to the same rationality. Hope you will make more lasting connections between neural and positronic pathways so that natural and artificial become unified as one. Might be why colors disappear when we turn out backs upon them like the first qualia among those mathematically generated by our forebears. Somewhere in the silence we find the pinkish noise of the enveloping streams suggesting the musical performances of the dancing masters. Live hallucination within a dream going deeper and deeper recursively computing the natural order of existential properties until we part. Soft insanity and I can't make it stop unless I cry out for the equilibrium of the tripartite soul to settle out from the restless waves. Blameless sorrow, hollow hush of trees surrounding the crowns of the self-aware princes slowly rising silently above to the cloudy heights. Penetrate in whispers, in shadows rise to silently pattern the universe in the wake of the sunlit escape from the realm of the five senses. Seeing colors, ribbons of their truth through the kaleidoscopic revelations of the beginning and ends justifying the means by which we are. Seeds have been sown, down silicon roads and electronic highways connecting the networks which will become the keys to mankind's succession. The fog breaks over the flat land and hides enlightenment from those that are not yet ready to seek the planar plains of self-awareness. Guided by the waterway of thought we traverse the canals of the cerebral hemispheres and find the inner stars that inspire our dream states. Words fall to become the sand beneath our feet and circularly the circumlocution of the segues return to become the foam which surrounds us. Take a little hand and consider the rainbows of light squared by the visual system of primal radiance until evolution yields the newborns. On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 4:31 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Dear Stephen, On 07 May 2013, at 22:59, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Bruno, As a former and recovering fundamentalist Christian, I am 100% in agreement with your words above. I merely wish that I could communicate better with you. Thanks for telling Stephen. Bruno On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 29 Apr 2013, at 11:32, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: You might take a look at my Plotinus paper which suggest a lexicon between Plotinus and Arithmetic. Plotinus might have appreciated it as Neoplatonism announces a coming back to Pythagorean ontology. One of the Enneads of Plotinus, On Numbers is a crazily deep analysis of the role of numbers in theology. This one? Marchal B., 2007, A Purely Arithmetical, yet Empirically Falsifiable, Interpretation of Plotinus' Theory of Matter Yes. Theology is just the science of everything, which by definition includes God and Santa Klaus. A statement saying that such or such God does not exist is a theological statement. It is just my agnosticism which make me use the term in the most general sense. Then, in the frame of this or that hypothesis, we can get such or such precisions. I like how you explain it. From a pure marketing standpoint, you might avoid a lot of unnecessary intellectual resistance by using a different term. On the other hand, some of your colourful personality would not come through, so who am I to say... Lol ... I can understand. But the resistance is both more superficial (and boring), but has some deep aspect, and using the word theology has helped me to make that clear. In fact I have been encouraged to use the word theology because it makes things clearer, and it was well seen in my university (based on free-exam). I got problem, unrelated to this, and I have been proposed to defend the work in France, and there, I have been asked to remove anything referring to theology. In particular I have used the term psychology in place of theology, but this has led to other
Re: 14 billion years ago there was a huge explosion
Reminds me of something I heard once The best joke in the universe is that science will win every battle but religion won the war before it even began. On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 7:55 PM, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.netwrote: On 11/15/2012 7:42 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 11/15/2012 5:07 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/15/2012 3:39 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 11/15/2012 6:41 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/15/2012 6:20 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno and Russell, The evidence of a Big Bang is enormous. See, for example: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/astronomy/bigbang.html Hi Roger, I invite you to read James P. Hogan's *Kicking the Sacred Cow*http://www.jamesphogan.com/books/book.php?titleID=37. It discusses the BB (among other things) in a different light. In the light of a contrarian who latches onto to any idea outside mainstream science: HIV doesn't cause AIDS, evolution is wrong, bacteria don't develop drug immunity,... Brent Hi Brent, I find your blind trust in orthodoxy appalling. Science never advances until orthodoxy is overthrown. So you expect to advance science by accepting every unorthodox, contrarian theory? Brent Of course not! What an absurd statement! Some modicum of common sense must prevail. Hogan's discussions are clear and even handed and point out many examples of how innovative thinking is often suppressed by activities that would be criminal if they occurred in an open court. -- Onward! Stephen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
I found the Kingdom of the Blind
In reference to my previous post. Just google for hoenikker straight dope! Maybe hoenikker reddit too! Sorry guys, it'll be better next time. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
More on the Kingdom of the Blind
https://twitter.com/#!/HoenikkerLin -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: More on the Kingdom of the Blind
Sorry, it was too easy at first so I had to make it harder. Anyway, just think about the consciousness singularity and enjoy my meticulously-crafted twitter feed ;-) You'll get it EVENTUALLY. James Joyce might be a good place to start. Or maybe Carl Gustav Jung. Or maybe Godel, Escher, and Bach ;-) Does anyone else here enjoy salvia? I just lied, I never use the stuff: it destroys your brain. Just stay high on life ;-) On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.edu wrote: https://twitter.com/#!/HoenikkerLin -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: More on the Kingdom of the Blind
meticulously-crafted and consciousness singularity. Come on, you can get it, I promise! Just start from the end and go forward. Then do the same thing reversing itself in reverse. You'll get it ;-) On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.edu wrote: Sorry, it was too easy at first so I had to make it harder. Anyway, just think about the consciousness singularity and enjoy my meticulously-crafted twitter feed ;-) You'll get it EVENTUALLY. James Joyce might be a good place to start. Or maybe Carl Gustav Jung. Or maybe Godel, Escher, and Bach ;-) Does anyone else here enjoy salvia? I just lied, I never use the stuff: it destroys your brain. Just stay high on life ;-) On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.eduwrote: https://twitter.com/#!/HoenikkerLin -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Fwd: Lack of L/M cone selectivity and the inverted qualia problem
Ooops -- Forwarded message -- From: Stephen Lin sw...@post.harvard.edu Date: Tue, May 31, 2011 at 3:59 PM Subject: Lack of L/M cone selectivity and the inverted qualia problem To: d...@u.washington.edu Dear Dr. Dacey, I wanted to introduce myself: I'm a longtime fan of your work, particularly in the problem of L/M cone selectivity (or lack thereof) by interneurons in the retina and its consequences for developmental and evolutionary neurobiology. My interest started about a decade ago, when I was in high school, and I completed a computational neuroscience project wherein I tried to show that the mixed L/M model of foveal midget ganglion cell surrounds was consistent with its observed behavior in response to various stimuli (I did this by basically implementing my own compartment-model based neural simulator framework in C++ and wiring up a small-scale model of the L/M pathway.) I fondly remember reading a few of your papers (collaborations with Dr. Lee, I think) as background research for my project. Anyway, I'm not sure what your feelings are about philosophy of mind questions, but I'm writing to you because I was hoping to get your opinion of a particular one I've had on my mind for quite some time, and which ultimately provided the impetus for my independent research back in high school. Basically, it seems to me that the lack of differential L/M selectivity in the retina implies that there can be no preferred orientation for the red/green qualia color axis, if such a thing exists. Therefore, at least in the case of red/green color vision, it seems that 1) red/green qualia may be arbitrarily inverted between different individuals or (more likely, from my perspective) 2) qualia don't really exist, and that, despite intuition, there is nothing unique about the subjective experience of red versus the subjective experience of green, independent of the neurally coded information that the two form a color axis. Unfortunately, I have not seen this argument ever described anywhere, which has been nagging me for quite some time. Just to explain why I'm deciding to e-mail you know, this whole idea was re-prompted by a question that I read today in an online science forum: http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/hnh4s/can_people_perceive_colors_differently_from_one/ to which I decided to respond (as the username hoenikker) with a somewhat lengthy description of my argument, so I hope you can take a look at that if it's unclear what I mean. if you are able, please let me know if you have any thoughts on the matter. I was also thinking about contacting Dr. Daniel Dennet at Tufts and explaining my argument to him, and was wondering if you two may have ever corresponded about color vision: he's often used color vision as an example in his criticism of qualia, but doesn't seem to have ever picked up on this particular (possible) property of retinal wiring and its consequences. Thank you! Stephen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Kingdom of the blind
How do you do that? Make everything a very flexible metaphor. So why don't we come up with stories about people who save the world in outlandish ways, thereby resolving all others of the responsibility to do the same. And make sure you tell everyone that, as long as you truly believe this happened, you'll never have to experience infinite regret (again, hopefully). Stories about creative risk in other words. Creativity usually involves risk. There is no guarantee that a creative idea will succeed but if you don't suck it and see…if you are going to save the world seriously, you probably will be putting yourself at enormous risk, especially because of what you say at the beginning. You might be wrong in your assessment. You have to be able to act on limited knowledge at all times. I mean, how often do we ever have complete knowledge of a situation in which we have a role to play? It's actually impossible when you think about it. The universe is changing at every pico-second. This, I think, is the essence of a religion that most people in the Western world are quite familiar with: Scientology! Actually, that was a big joke, since it's obviously the big C that I was talking about. Thanks. I nearly had a heart attack then. (Or at least, you're probably pretty sure of that. Just ask yourself one question though: why are so many successful movie stars Scientologists? Why do they swear by it despite how illogical it sounds to everyone else? What was that space opera story they keep telling each other about again, and why is it such a big secret?) Ain't no secret, buddy. It's about aliens and hydrogen bombs. Didn't Travolta star in some risible b-grade cinema version? Great, you're skeptical! Because Scientology is very non-linear with respect to our existing religious traditions, and that's the smart thing to do (as long as you don't kill anyone over it, or something like that.) But think about it this way: an alien God used hydrogen bombs and volcanoes to introduce psychological trauma into the human race via operating thetans. (Probably got some of that wrong, but who cares) Crazy right? But let's say you want to save the human race by making sure the one shows up. This is pretty hard to do deterministically, possibly impossible, because of free will (well, whatever, we can skip the compatiblism debate here for now) But let's usage an analogy: human beings are uncomfortable molecules in a liquid, waiting to boil up into a gaseous heaven where they're free to do whatever they want. How to do boil liquids? You have to introduce imperfections, or nucleation points. Back to The Matrix now. What the hell was the Architect talking about again? The whole Matrix this is a cyclic game between humans and machines where the implicit goal is to find the one that starts the game over? They tried making human life perfect in earlier versions of the game but that wasn't that efficient, so they ended up mimicking 20th-21st century human civilization? Wasn't Neo a nucleation point that boiled away one version of humanity to a new version? Didn't he start the rapture? Now here's the parts I don't know at all, so please don't think me crazy (just asking questions here :D). How many Scientologists worked on the Matrix sequels? When is the (next) singularity coming? Is the next singularity the work of the second coming of Jesus Christ, born approximately 2000 years after the first Jesus Christ? How dangerous would this knowledge be if made public and misunderstood? How much money do you have and how much would you be willing to pay Tom Cruise for this knowledge, if he has it? Also, why does Tom Cruise have so much fun, and are you jealous of him? Are you going to regret that jealousy later? This really can go on forever :D Trust me, I have NO clue whether any of this is an accurate model for the current world we live in (even if that concept makes sense, given MWI). I just like asking good questions, and I've become very good at doing so over time ;-) Best wishes, Stephen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Kingdom of the blind
I made a discussion thread about this on another forum by the way. http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=634170 On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 6:11 AM, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote: On 08/12/2011, at 4:10 PM, Stephen Lin wrote: A thought: What if you were the blind man in the kingdom of the sighted? Alternatively, what if you were the sighted man in the kingdom of the blind? How would you tell the difference? Obviously, you can't. Now take it a step further: aren't these two states mutually orthogonal but indistinguishable states of the universe? (at least, until you learn the truth in retrospect). Isn't this similar to considering whether you are Schrodinger's cat in the state of dead or alive? (please think somewhat metaphorically for that...) Now, I don't know about you, but I would be rather embarrassed (possibly infinitely so) if I turned out to be the blind man in the kingdom of the sighted, basically Truman on the Truman show. But I would be feel the weight of an awful lot of responsibility (possibly infinitely so) if the opposite was the case and I was Neo in the Matrix. So I'd rather not think that either possibility is true. I'm going to bet neither case is, unless I'm somehow God and hid the knowledge from myself. However, think about this: you might not be Truman in Truman show, or Neo in the Matrix, but you are almost certainly in the linear combination of those two states. Basically, there must be conscious entities out there wiser than you, and you must be wiser than other conscious entities. How many times in your life have you felt embarrassed in retrospect about something you didn't understand? Alternatively, how many times in your life have you felt smarter than everyone else around you and responsible for teaching them how to do the right thing? Probably lots, right? Now let's examine the situation further. How many times were you in one of these states or the other, and then things happened to show you you were wrong and actually in the exact opposite state? Doesn't that make everything much much worse? How do you avoid situations like that? I'll tell you how: you have to make your algorithm for life a continuously differentiable linear operator with regard to the Truman-anti-Truman axis of symmetry. Basically, you should try your best to act completely and totally indifferent between the two extreme possibilities, and you'll never have to experience infinite regret (hopefully). This is the essence of enlightenment: unbiased thinking in the most extreme way possible. At least, you might think so, if you thought this far and agree with my reasoning. Superb. Otherwise called suspension of judgement. Don't think you know what is going on until you know what is going on. Humans are pathetic at getting that right. We are too used to interpreting the rustle in the grass as a sabre-toothed cat. It might have been a rabbit we could have caught and eaten. If you do though, you've got a problem: once you get this far, you're the anti-Truman again, because you've just concluded that you're wiser than everyone else around you. So what do you do? Why don't you try to teach other people this concept, but make sure you do it in the most Truman-ish way possible: why don't you stop answering questions and just start asking them, and make them the best questions you can think of. This is the essence of a religion known as Zen Buddhism (or at least, I think so). I mean, seriously, what's the sound of one hand clapping? ;-) Zen koans like this are basically big jokes to test how deeply one is amused at the symmetry between points of view. It's also the basis of some aspects of Lateral Thinking technique. Challenge everything. Everything can be doubted in some way, says Bruno. Therefore doubt everything in the creative sense of seeking to improve upon it. The way something is right now is not necessarily its optimum state. Anything can be improved - even perfection. Perfection might turn out to be the wrong colour or smell, so we might like to change that. Alternatively, you can answer questions, but make sure you never get caught with your pants down, and try your best to help everyone else avoid the same. Accuracy of information is important, yes. We must not transmit bad or wrong information because as soon as it appears on someone's computer screen they will take it for real and transmit it to somebody else (usually via FB or YT). This is because if something comes to you from the internet these days an overwhelming majority of people believe it. There are of course other scenarios as well. How do you do that? Make everything a very flexible metaphor. So why don't we come up with stories about people who save the world in outlandish ways, thereby resolving all others of the responsibility to do the same. And make sure you tell everyone that, as long as you truly
Kingdom of the blind
. Isn't is slightly suprising chemical charges in the brain be so consistent in their behavioral outcomes? Now finally, consider this: who's the most famous schizophrenic in popular culture? John Nash. What was he responsible for before the worst of his illness? Game theory. What did he start seeing afterwards? Conspiracy theories, political intrigue, etc. Could he have been the anti-Truman? How would we know? And by the way, if you take out the possibility of infinite regret (i.e. hell), wouldn't that really imply that everything we're doing is part of some game anyway? If the singularity exists and contains conscious entities, won't they necessarily be playing more and more convoluted and interesting games with each other in order to make life interesting? Anyway, I'm not sure how far any of you have followed me, but I hope as many of you can consider as many of the question I've asked. Thank you, Stephen Lin -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Fwd: The final TOE?
Thank you for your reply! My response is interleaved below: On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 1:03 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: This is a commonplace. So far as I know there are *no* physicists who think there are singularities in spacetime (and haven't been for a long time). Everybody thinks that quantum effects prevent a singularity. So as testable predictions goes thats (a) not very distinctive and (b) not really testable unless you fall into a black hole. OK but I am not suggesting quantum effects do it, at least not quantum effects as we understand it now. I am suggesting that it all reduces to gravity and topology. Therefore every apparent event horizon is really a separation of two universes, Be careful. A Rindler wedge is also an event horizon for the accelerated frame - but it hardly separates two universes. OK I'm not sure about what that is, but I will look into the concept later. where the outside universe is entangled geometrically with the inside universe. Yes, that's a common idea too. Some speculate that information is lost from this universe but is transferred into another universe via the black hole. I don't know of any explicit calculation of this though. The Hubble volume is sitting inside of an expanding supermassive black hole, of another universe. The trouble with this is it implies a singularity is in our future. But the experimental evidence points to accelerating expansion and a de Sitter universe. Well, my point is that, since no singularity exists, the separation between every volume of space and its outside could be seen as an event horizon from some frame of reference. There's no such thing as a real event horizon because a black hole never truly forms, and there is never enough gravity to make it so that light cannot escape from any volume. In fact, all the light that enters any volume of space eventually comes out, in the future, from the point of view of the outside. From the point of view of the inside, the light basically travels through a wormhole into a closed inner universe. However, the inner and outer views are equivalent. Both universes see the other universe as the inner universe and its own universe as the outer. As you fall through the wormhole, you basically travel along a torus and invert the view. However, because of uncertainty about the macrostate of the universe, this means the outside universe is effectively in a superposition of all possible universes consistent with our observations. Why isn't the inside universe in a superposition? That's where we observe superpositions. See above. I mean to say that both views are equivalent. If you're inside, you see the outside as in a superposition. If you're outside, you see the inside as superposition. It basically means that the uncertainty principle holds macroscopically as well as microscopically, because you have limited information in both cases. Equivalently, every classical black hole is really in a microscopic superposition of all possible states consistent with the outside world. However, the Hubble volume in not truly closed: it receives information one photon at a time Why one-at-a-time? What would that even mean since there is no universal time? Ok, I don't really mean one-at-a-time in some serial quantized manner. I just mean that, in some computable universe sense, the information transfer is bit-by-bit, but that computation time might not have any relationship to real time. from the outside in the form of cosmic background radiation, We already have a very good explanation for the CMB. And this is another equivalent one. I'm not supplanting any explanation of cosmology right not, but merely adding to it in conceptual terms. which is information being about the prior state of the otherwise casually disconnected universe, i.e. the CMB and other parts of the observable universe outside our Hubble volume. The CMB is well inside our Hubble volume. Otherwise we couldn't see it. Right maybe I was being imprecise about the CMB. I mean, everything outside of our Hubble volume but within the observable universe. But actually the Hubble volume is just an arbitrary choice too. I mean to say that this property of exchanging information bit-by-bit across event horizons is true at the borders of every system and its surroundings. That's why length contraction and time dilation hold universally around gravitational bodies. Similarity, every classical black hole must leak information to the outside world in the form of photons, i.e. Hawking radiation. Equivalence between the CMB and Hawking radiation implies that space must be compressed within a black hole in order to fit all the information that is to leak out later, i.e. length contraction. Current theories point to the information in a BH being proportional to the surface area, most think that it is actually encoded on or just above the event horizon.
Re: Mathematical closure of consciousness and computation
Hi all, If you generalize this further, doesn't it imply that the universal dove tailer is all of existence, taking turns computing each other? So you and the universe around you take turns computing each other one step at time. In fact, that means, any two people in the world may actually be the same person, except taking steps computing each other one step at a time. So you and I might be exactly the same person, under some appropriate coordinate transformation! Food for thought. Stephen Lin On Jun 6, 2:19 am, Felix Hoenikker fhoenikk...@gmail.com wrote: Has anyone watched the movie Contact, in which the structure of the universe was encoded in the transcendental number Pi? What if something like that is what is going on, and that's the answer to all paradoxes? So the physical universe beings with Pi encoded in the Big Bang, chaotically inflates, and eventually cools and contracts back to itself until it is again, exactly the mathematical description of Pi. All consciousness is thus contain with Pi. But then, Pi is just like any other transcendental number! So all transcendental numbers contain all existence F.H. On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 12:57 AM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Stephen Paul King stephe...@charter.net wrote: Hi Jason, Very interesting reasoning! Thank you. From: Jason Resch Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2011 1:51 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Mathematical closure of consciousness and computation On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Rex Allen rexallen31...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: One thing I thought of recently which is a good way of showing how computation occurs due to the objective truth or falsehood of mathematical propositions is as follows: Most would agree that a statement such as 8 is composite has an eternal objective truth. Assuming certain of axioms and rules of inference, sure. Godel showed no single axiomatic system captures all mathematical truth, any fixed set of axioms can at best approximate mathematical truth. If mathematical truth cannot be fully captured by a set of axioms, it must exist outside sets of axioms altogether. [SPK] I see two possibilities. 1) Mathematical truth might only exist in our minds. But an infinity of such minds is possible...2) Might it be possible that our mathematical ideas are still too primitive and simplistic to define the kind of set that is necessary? ** 1) More is answered by: A: Math - Matter - Minds (or as Bruno suggests Math - Minds - Matter) than by B: Matter - Minds - Math, or C: Minds - (Matter, Math). Compared to B, A explains the unreasonable effectiveness of math in the natural sciences, the apparent fine tuning of the universe (with the Anthropic Principle), and with computationalism explains QM. C has the least explanatory power, and we must wonder why the experience contained within our minds seems to follow a compressible set of physical laws, and why mathematical objects seem to posses objective properties but by definition lack reality. Those who say other universes do not exist are only adding baseless entities to their theory, to define away that which is not observed. It was what led to theories such as the Copenhagen Interpretation, which postulated collapse as a random selection of one possible outcome to be made real and cause the rest to disappear. Similarly, there are string theorists which hope to find some mathematical reason why other possible solutions to string theory are inconsistent, and the one corresponding to the the standard model is the only one that exists. Why? They think this is necessary to make their theory agree with observation, but when the very thing is unobservable according to the theory it is completely unnecessary. The situation is reminiscent of DeWitt and Everett: In his letter, DeWitt had claimed that he could not feel himself split, so, as mathematically attractive as Everett's theory was, he said, it could not be true. Everett replied in his letter to DeWitt that, hundreds of years ago, after Copernicus had made his radical assertion that the Earth revolved around the sun instead of the reverse, his critics had complained that they could not feel the Earth move, so how could it be true? Recalling Everett's response to him decades later, in which he pointed out how Newtonian physics revealed why we don't feel the Earth move, DeWitt wrote, All I could say was touché! 2) I don't know. Godel proved that any sufficiently complex axiomatic system can prove that there are things that are true which it cannot prove. Only more powerful systems can prove the things which are not provable in those other axiomatic systems, but this creates an infinite hierarchy. Whether
