Re: Science is a religion by itself.

Quantum electrodynamics + Biology = Who am I ? ==. Cells make copies of themselves. Different cells make different copies of themselves. Cells come in all shapes and sizes. Somehow these different cells are tied between themselves and during pregnancy process of 9 months gradually ( ! ) and

Re: Science is a religion by itself.

On Jan 8, 12:42 pm, "Roger Clough" wrote: > Hi meekerdb > > Russell was a brilliant logician, but that's all he was. > > > > Brent To have logical mind is very good. But our brain sometime works unconscious. =. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ev

Re: Science is a religion by itself.

On Jan 8, 1:48 am, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/7/2013 10:47 AM, John Clark wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 mailto:spudboy...@aol.com>> wrote: > > >     > Consider God, a word for Mind > > > OK, I have a mind therefore I am God. > > > I said it before I'll say it again, for some strange reason that i

Re: Science is a religion by itself.

On Jan 7, 7:53 pm, John Clark wrote: > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 Roger Clough wrote: > > > Theism, like atheism, is unprovable. > > Why is that? You're saying that even though God is omnipotent He is > incapable of proving His existence to us. I can prove my existence to you > but God can not. That s

Re: Science is a religion by itself.

On Jan 7, 6:42 pm, John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 4:47 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net > > wrote: > > Science is a religion by itself. Why? > > Becouse the God can create and govern the Universe > > only using physical laws, formulas, equations. > > Then God must get very board because th

Re: Whoever invented the word "God" invented atheism.

On 1/8/2013 4:42 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: 2013/1/9 meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> On 1/8/2013 12:25 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: Le me add some meat here Nah. It's just your wishful thinking that everybody has to believe in God. We can not reduce the

Re: A paranormal prediction for the next year

On Tuesday, January 8, 2013 1:27:20 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at Craig Weinberg >wrote: > > >> >> unlike psi it would be easily repeatable, if one person who claimed to >>> have a sense of humor laughed and said that was a very good joke it is >>> statistically ver

Re: A paranormal prediction for the next year

On Tuesday, January 8, 2013 12:37:47 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > On 1/8/2013 6:36 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Saturday, January 5, 2013 8:47:14 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: >> >> On 1/5/2013 5:39 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: >> >> The easy problem is harder than the hard problem in the sense

Re: Whoever invented the word "God" invented atheism.

On 1/8/2013 12:25 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: Le me add some meat here Nah. It's just your wishful thinking that everybody has to believe in God. We can not reduce the concept of God to a boring principle that we need to put somewhere. Like a ugly furniture inherited from the grand-parent

Re: Question: Robotic truth

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 4:27 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: > > > > 2013/1/8 Richard Ruquist >> >> At the most basic level reality is a discrete digital particle arithmetic >> with no need for further calculations in a block universe. >> > Then it is indistinguishable from a contiuous or discrete ma

Re: Question: Robotic truth

2013/1/8 Richard Ruquist > At the most basic level reality is a discrete digital particle arithmetic > with no need for further calculations in a block universe. > > Then it is indistinguishable from a contiuous or discrete mathematical manifold of some kind. This manifold is anthropically select

Re: Question: Robotic truth

At the most basic level reality is a discrete digital particle arithmetic with no need for further calculations in a block universe. At a higher level it is analog in the realm of quantum waves and fields including the electromagnetic field and perhaps some bosons And at the highest/physical leve

Re: Question: Robotic truth

On 1/8/2013 10:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 07 Jan 2013, at 23:57, meekerdb wrote: In Bruno's theory both mind and matter are products of computation. I think it will turn out, as you say, that they are mutually necessary. At *our level* I grant that they are both necessary. But this does

Re: Question: Robotic truth

On 07 Jan 2013, at 23:57, meekerdb wrote: In Bruno's theory both mind and matter are products of computation. I think it will turn out, as you say, that they are mutually necessary. At *our level* I grant that they are both necessary. But this does not mean they are necessarily necessary

Re: A paranormal prediction for the next year

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at Craig Weinberg wrote: > >> unlike psi it would be easily repeatable, if one person who claimed to >> have a sense of humor laughed and said that was a very good joke it is >> statistically very likely (although not certain) that another person who >> also claimed to have

Re: Wave collapse and consciousness

On 08 Jan 2013, at 15:57, Roger Clough wrote: Wave collapse and consciousness According to the discussion below, a field only has potential existence, it does not exist by itself. It requires a body to interact with it. This difference is easily confused in usage. For example, we may speak

Re: [4DWorldx] Humble coin toss thrust to heart of multiverse debate

On 08 Jan 2013, at 15:50, Richard Ruquist wrote: On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 1:47 AM, Anna wrote: Humble coin toss thrust to heart of multiverse debate 02 January 2013 by Jacob Aron Magazine issue 2898. Subscribe and save For similar stories, visit the Cosmology Topic Guide WHY is there a 1 in 2

Re: A paranormal prediction for the next year

On 1/8/2013 9:30 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 06 Jan 2013, at 02:47, meekerdb wrote: On 1/5/2013 5:39 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: The easy problem is harder than the hard problem in the sense that it is the long way around. No, it's harder because you can tell when you've failed. I guess you

Re: Is Sheldrake credible ? I personally think so.

On 08 Jan 2013, at 15:37, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal IMHO It doesn't matter what type of field. According to the definition below, a field is like a map, it is not the territory itself. ".that would act on a body at any given point in that region" The word "would" tells us

Re: HOW YOU CAN BECOME A LIBERAL THEOLOGIAN IN JUST 4 STEPS.

On 1/8/2013 9:14 AM, John Clark wrote: On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Bruno Marchal > wrote: >GOD means the reality in which you believe. Friends, are you tired of your old job, it's time to change your occupation and make big bucks, amaze your friends, be a hit

Re: Science is a religion by itself.

On 1/8/2013 6:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 07 Jan 2013, at 19:53, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 Roger Clough mailto:rclo...@verizon.net>> wrote: > Theism, like atheism, is unprovable. Why is that? You're saying that even though God is omnipotent He is incapable of proving His

Re: Is Sheldrake credible ? I personally think so.

On 1/8/2013 6:37 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal IMHO It doesn't matter what type of field. According to the definition below, a field is like a map, it is not the territory itself. ".that would act on a body at any given point in that region" The word "would" tells us that a field

Re: A paranormal prediction for the next year

On 1/8/2013 6:36 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Saturday, January 5, 2013 8:47:14 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: On 1/5/2013 5:39 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: The easy problem is harder than the hard problem in the sense that it is the long way around. No, it's harder because you can te

Re: Whoever invented the word "God" invented atheism.

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Roger Clough wrote: >Whoever invented the word "God" invented atheism. > Yes, I agree with that, one clearly had to come before the other. Before some human invented God there was no need for another human to invent atheism. John K Clark -- You received this

Re: A paranormal prediction for the next year

On 06 Jan 2013, at 02:47, meekerdb wrote: On 1/5/2013 5:39 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: The easy problem is harder than the hard problem in the sense that it is the long way around. No, it's harder because you can tell when you've failed. I guess you meant "it's harder because you CAN'T t

Re: Science is a religion by itself.

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 Bruno Marchal wrote: > there is no reason to identify God with the God-father of Christian > "theory". > Conservative Christianity is deplorable in a great number of ways but it is superior to liberal theology in one important regard, it states that it might be a good idea if

Re: Bertrand Russell's view of Leibniz's definition of substance

Roger, Thank you for this post an esp for the link to 'Russell on Leibniz'. Richard On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Roger Clough wrote: > Here's Bertrand Russell's view of Leibniz's definition of substance > > http://www.ditext.com/russell/leib1.html#3 > > > Every proposition has a subject and a

Re: Wave collapse and consciousness

For the record, Roger's post illuminates an optimal division between the mind: the EM, and quantum waves and, fields; and the body: mainly electrons and photons. We all seem to agree that the mind is arithmetic. We have some division on if that property extends to the body: like, for instance, a

Re: Whoever invented the word "God" invented atheism.

that reminds me that we do not really know what a word means until we understand what the opposite stands for. a sorta duality that math may be based on that may even be the basis of existence of how something can come from nothing. RR a semantic toe On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Roger Clough

Re: Re: Re: Re: Is Sheldrake credible ? I personally think so.

Hi Roger, On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Roger Clough wrote: > Hi Platonist Guitar Cowboy > > Better data connected to opinion than opinion alone. > > How is opinion not connected to data? Have you found a way of neatly separating the information and data from opinion and beliefs? If you hav

Re: From nominalism to Scientifc Materialism Re: Is Sheldrake credible? Ipersonally think so.

Hi Brent, On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 12:33 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/7/2013 5:09 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 2:56 AM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 1/6/2013 3:45 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 12:19 AM, Stephen P. King >> wr

Re: Re: Science is a religion by itself.

Hi John Clark. God so far has proven his existence to nobody, unless subjectively (spiritually), primarily because God is subjective, not objective. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 1/8/2013 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." - Woody Allen - Receiving the followi

Re: A paranormal prediction for the next year

On Sunday, January 6, 2013 1:24:48 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 Craig Weinberg >wrote: > > >> >>Even people who have no sense of humor can deduce that other people do >>> have it, >> >> >> >Would they if only 0.001% of the population had a sense of humor? >> > > Yes, b

Whoever invented the word "God" invented atheism.

Hi Bruno Marchal Whoever invented the word "God" invented atheism. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 1/8/2013 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." - Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2013-01-08

Wave collapse and consciousness

Wave collapse and consciousness According to the discussion below, a field only has potential existence, it does not exist by itself. It requires a body to interact with it. This difference is easily confused in usage. For example, we may speak of an electromagnetic field as if it is a real

Re: Science is a religion by itself.

On 07 Jan 2013, at 19:53, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 Roger Clough wrote: > Theism, like atheism, is unprovable. Why is that? You're saying that even though God is omnipotent He is incapable of proving His existence to us. I can prove my existence to you I doubt this. You can

Re: Science is a religion by itself.

On 07 Jan 2013, at 19:47, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 wrote: > Consider God, a word for Mind OK, I have a mind therefore I am God. I said it before I'll say it again, for some strange reason that is unknown to me many people are willing to abandon the idea of God but not the

Re: [4DWorldx] Humble coin toss thrust to heart of multiverse debate

Anna, There is an ongoing discussion over on the google Everything list about Quantum Suicide, which is nearly equivalent to a coin toss. QS is proposed as a test of MWI- the Many World Interpretation of quantum mechanics. In QS it depends essentially on a coin toss if an experimenter is either k

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Subjective states can be somehow extractedfrombrainsviaacomputer

Hi Craig Weinberg Exactly. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 1/8/2013 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." - Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Craig Weinberg Receiver: everything-list Time: 2013-01-08, 09:23:56 Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Subje

Re: Re: Is Sheldrake credible ? I personally think so.

Hi Bruno Marchal IMHO It doesn't matter what type of field. According to the definition below, a field is like a map, it is not the territory itself. ".that would act on a body at any given point in that region" The word "would" tells us that a field only has potential existence, not exis

Re: A paranormal prediction for the next year

On Saturday, January 5, 2013 8:47:14 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > On 1/5/2013 5:39 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > The easy problem is harder than the hard problem in the sense that it is > the long way around. > > > No, it's harder because you can tell when you've failed. > > Brent > It's not h

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Subjective states can be somehow extracted frombrainsviaacomputer

On Tuesday, January 8, 2013 5:23:55 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote: > > Hi Telmo Menezes > > Presumably the brain works with analog, not digital, signals. You are both missing the more important issue - signals cannot be decoded in the brain. It's tempting to think that is possible because we a

Bertrand Russell's view of Leibniz's definition of substance

Here's Bertrand Russell's view of Leibniz's definition of substance http://www.ditext.com/russell/leib1.html#3 Every proposition has a subject and a predicate. A subject may have predicates which are qualities existing at various times. (Such a subject is called a substance.) [Roger Cloug

Re: Is Sheldrake credible ? I personally think so.

On 07 Jan 2013, at 17:26, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Yes, the theories are nonphysical, and in addition, quantum theories quantum theory applies to quantum fields, which are nonphysical. This is hard for me to grasp. What do you mean by "quantum fields" are not physical? It seems

Re: Re: Science is a religion by itself.

Hi meekerdb Russell was a brilliant logician, but that's all he was. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 1/8/2013 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." - Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: meekerdb Receiver: everything-list Time: 2013-01-0

Re: Re: Is Sheldrake credible ? I personally think so.

Hi meekerdb Mathematical structures such as quantum fields are not in spacetime. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 1/8/2013 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." - Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: meekerdb Receiver: everything-list Time:

Re: Re: Is Sheldrake credible ? I personally think so.

Hi meekerdb Even bacteria have some miniscule amount of intelligence, which is IMHO the ability to autonomously make choices. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 1/8/2013 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." - Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From

Re: Re: "The best of all possible Worlds."

Hi meekerdb Picking and choosing can sometimes be incorrect. When you try to find the meaning of a verse from the Bible, ideally you should find the meaning from the Bible as a whole. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 1/8/2013 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." - Wood

Re: Re: Re: Subjective states can be somehow extracted from brains viaacomputer

Hi Telmo Menezes The electronics presumably requires a digital signal. But the brain presumably uses analog signals. And there is the raster line and sync signal problem. There is the digital pixel problem, which uses only 3 colors: blue,green,red. How can all of this work ? [Roger C

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Subjective states can be somehow extracted frombrainsviaacomputer

Hi Telmo Menezes Presumably the brain works with analog, not digital, signals. But the redisplay of the brain image requires a digital image signal. How can that happen ? If the recponstructed brain image has no sync signal, how couold it display in a digital device ? [Roger Clough], [

intuition

intuition and 1p Intuition (philosophy), immediate (not inferred) a priori knowledge or experiential belief n�tu�i�tion [in-too-ish-uh?n, -tyoo-] noun 1. direct perception of truth, fact, etc., independent of any reasoning process; immediate apprehension. 2. a fact, truth, etc., perceive