Bruno,
I don't really remember what saying yes to the doctor entails.
If it signifies a willingness to be cloned by computation, shouldn't we be
saying yes to the Star Trek technician who controls the transporter? m.a.
- Original Message -
From: "Bruno Marchal"
To:
S
I give the answer.
On 17 Sep 2009, at 16:27, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> On 16 Sep 2009, at 18:12, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>> If it is OK, in the next post we begin to address the computability
>> issue. I give you an anticipative exercise or subject reflection.
>> This is a deep exercis
Adult videos. All content are free to watch and checked by our support
team. http://econuity.net/images/adult/
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email
Hi Ronald,
Mendelson' book is an excellent book.
The many editions of Boolos and Jeffrey are very good, but the
mathematical logic part is not really self-contained. I like very much
also the book by Epstein and Carnielli, and Epstein alone wrote nice
big books on both classical and non c
Bruno:
It sounds as if the way to begin is with the latest Mendelson book.
Ronald
On Sep 18, 2:55 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> Hi Ronald,
>
> You may ask Günther Greindl, who asked me references for the UDA and
> AUDA, and he put them on the list archive.
>
> g
Yes, Bruno, it helps - however: I did not want to put you into any apology!
The list is a free communication among free spirits and controversy is part
of it.
What I 'read' in your reply still "sticks" within 'math' and my principal
point is: the image represented is STILL what a human mind MAY thi
2009/9/18 Flammarion :
>> In that case, what light does the comp approach shed on the 'causal
>> significance' of the inside view - i.e. with reference to the presumed
>> 'causal closure' of the physical narrative and the supposed
>> epiphenominalism or over-determination of consciousness with re
On 18 Sep 2009, at 10:46, Flammarion wrote:
>
>
>
> On 16 Sep, 18:52, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>> On 16 Sep 2009, at 17:25, Flammarion wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 16 Sep, 15:51, "m.a." wrote:
the ocean of virtual particles which may give
rise to all "real" particles exists somewhere between m
On 16 Sep, 18:52, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> On 16 Sep 2009, at 17:25, Flammarion wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 16 Sep, 15:51, "m.a." wrote:
> >> the ocean of virtual particles which may give
> >> rise to all "real" particles exists somewhere between matter and
> >> thought.
>
> > I see no reason to belie
On 17 Sep, 17:35, David Nyman wrote:
> 2009/9/17 Bruno Marchal :
>
> > Then for the inside/personal views, the whole of human math including
> > Cantor paradise cannot be enough to describe the human mind. It is
> > more general:
>
> In that case, what light does the comp approach shed on the '
On 17 Sep 2009, at 23:55, Flammarion wrote:
>
>
>
> On 17 Sep, 00:52, David Nyman wrote:
>> 2009/9/16 Flammarion :
>>
>>> The knowabilitry of a claim about what powers numbers
>>> have can only depend on what labels are correctly attached.
>>> Petrol is not flammable just becaue I attached the
On 17 Sep 2009, at 18:17, John Mikes wrote:
> Dear Bruno,
>
> it is not very convincing when you dissect my sentences and
> interject assuring remarks on statements to come later in the
> sentence, negating such remarks in advance, on a different basis.
>
> I argued that - upon what you (an
On 17 Sep 2009, at 18:35, David Nyman wrote:
>
> 2009/9/17 Bruno Marchal :
>
>> Then for the inside/personal views, the whole of human math including
>> Cantor paradise cannot be enough to describe the human mind. It is
>> more general:
>
> In that case, what light does the comp approach shed on
13 matches
Mail list logo
