Hi meekerdb
a= not or anti, so atheist is not a theist or is an antitheism.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/11/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: meekerdb
Receiver: everything-list
Time:
Hi Bruno Marchal
A life form is a soul of some type.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/11/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-10, 11:51:49
Hi Bruno Marchal
A life field is similar to Sheldrake's morphisms,
Leibniz's substances or L's monads or L's souls.
The physical is that which is extended in space.
Dreams, like mind or ideas, are not extended in space, so not physical.
The rest I agree with you on.
[Roger Clough],
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:33 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 1/10/2013 4:23 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Do you think there can be something that is intelligent but not complex
(and use whatever definitions of intelligent and complex you want).
A thermostat is much less complex
Space and time may be only on the mind in the Kantian sense. I don´t find
that space must be independent of the mind. space and time may be the way
we perceive a space-time manifold which is pure mathematic and nothing
else. Maybe we can see space out there and we can think on geometry in a
Dear Bruno:
- As I tried to show in robotic Truth, religion is a neccesity for the
operation of social beings.
For all machines, actually. Even when isolated. the robotic truth can be
approached by introspection when the machine complexity is above the Löbian
threshold.
That´s absolutely
The Universe ( as a whole) is a Double World: next to Matter World
( a few % of whole mass of Universe) exist Vacuum World
( with more than 90% of whole mass of Universe).
Question:
How can the more than 90% of Vacuum Mass in the Universe
(dark mass, dark energy, quantum virtual particles,
Hi Bruno Marchal
OK.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/11/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-10, 12:04:54
Subject: Re: Sensing the presence of God
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:21 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net
socra...@bezeqint.net wrote:
Charles Law is appropriate at or near absolute zero ,
because this law belongs to the particles of ' ideal gas' ,
it means that these particles can exist in the absolute vacuum:
T=0K.
no, not OK
--
You
On Friday, January 11, 2013 12:27:54 AM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/10/2013 9:20 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 7:33:06 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/10/2013 4:23 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Do you think there can be something that is intelligent but not complex
Hi Craig Weinberg
Due to their universal perceptions, monads should be extremely complex.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/11/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Craig Weinberg
Receiver:
Hi socra...@bezeqint.net
I don't believe that you can explain perception without God (or something like
Himn, perhaps Universal Mind) being the observer.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/11/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the
Hi Bruno Marchal
Thanks. I am finally beginning to understand your concept of dreaming machines.
A fertile idea, which, when understood, makes comp seem more realizable.
The inverse process --producing solids with structures by
a process such as the precipitation of ice crystals in a glass
Hi Richard Ruquist
For the umpteenth time, monads are not physical, they cannot be some kind of
product of EM waves.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/11/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Richard
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
I don't believe that you can explain perception without God
And how do you explain perception WITH God except by saying God just did
it? If the God theory could actually explain something and not just chant
God did it I'd go to
M-M did find that the speed of light was independent of direction.
If there were an aether, and light propagated through it as a wave,
and since the earth would be moving through the ether, then light should travel
at
different speeds in different directions.
But it didn't. So either
Yet another interpretation of the M-M experiment (that light travelled
at the same speed regardless of direction) is that as the Bible says, the
earth is fixed, and presumably the aether with it. So no relative motion
problem.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/11/2013
Forever is a
Hi Richard Ruquist
The monads are not BEC's, because presumably BECs are physical.
Monads aren't
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/11/2013
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Richard Ruquist
Receiver:
Is experimentation even theoretically possible at the Planck length/width?
This could effect EM, and, of course also impacts your Light post.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to
Reminds me of an old short by Larry Niven, called All the Myriad Ways,
where a police detective tries to uncover why radom murder-suicides are
happening, (That world is where scientists discover how to travel to different
Earths) and had discovered one, where the Cuban War was just a wet
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
Physicists often do experiemnts on crystals at 0 oK or near there.
There is no such thing as nearly zero just as there is no such thing as
nearly infinite or nearly pregnant; the Third law of Thermodynamics says
that you
On 10 Jan 2013, at 19:30, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/10/2013 7:23 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 19:37, John Clark wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net
wrote:
I sense God's presence.
That's nice, but how do you know (and more important how do
In a message dated 1/11/2013 2:27:33 AM Eastern Standard Time,
jasonre...@gmail.com writes:
1) Choose some religion, it doesn't matter which
2) Find an idea some adherents of that religion put forward but almost no
one seriously believes in or is easily shown to be inconsistent
3) Assume
What is vacuum?
=.
The problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion,
is the basic problem now before physics. Really, if you can’t
correctly
describe the vacuum, how it is possible to expect a correct
description
of something more complex?
/ Paul Dirac ./
#
The most fundamental
On 10 Jan 2013, at 20:02, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/10/2013 8:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Empirical proofs can be ostensive.
But I prefer not using proof for that. It can only be misleading
when we do applied logic. I prefer to call that empirical
evidences.
So I think the two kinds
On 10 Jan 2013, at 20:08, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/10/2013 8:10 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 22:03, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/9/2013 7:20 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 13:18, Roger Clough wrote:
According to Plato, all love, all truth, and all beauty comes
from
Hi Rog,
Crystals are not gases- req'd for Charles law to apply.
Rich
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
Hi Richard Ruquist
Physicists often do experiemnts on crystals at 0 oK or near there.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/11/2013
Forever is
BEC condensates may contain any kind of particle, not just physicsl
particles. However, we presume that the mathematics is more or less
the same for all BECs and therefore we can come to understand BECs
with physical experiments. Presumably monads are particles, seeing
that they are discrete and
On Friday, January 11, 2013 12:02:57 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at Roger Clough rcl...@verizon.net javascript:wrote:
So either there's no ether, or light has a fixed velocity.
No, light has a fixed velocity with or without the aether, it's a
experimental result
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, January 11, 2013 12:02:57 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at Roger Clough rcl...@verizon.net wrote:
So either there's no ether, or light has a fixed velocity.
No, light has a fixed
On 10 Jan 2013, at 20:37, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
It's not working just fine if *repeated* occurence of such
*extremelly low probability* occurs.
I recall that you are the one who insisted for fixing a final world/
date in which we evaluate the theories (MWI, ~MWI), without any
forward
Right. Monads are below the quantum level and you have argued,
correctly I think, that not even quantum waves are physical. However,
monads may have a complex structure as you say below snipped and
string theory derives what that complex structure looks like including
the super EM flux that may be
On 1/11/2013 2:12 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:33 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 1/10/2013 4:23 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Do you think there can be something that is intelligent but not complex
(and
use
On 10 Jan 2013, at 21:43, John Clark wrote:
Perhaps the Quantum Suicide experiment has already been performed
and on a global scale. After Hugh Everett developed the many Worlds
interpretation in his doctoral dissertation he was disappointed at
the poor reception it received and never
On 10 Jan 2013, at 23:05, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 17:03, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 09 Jan 2013, at 13:26, Telmo Menezes
On 10 Jan 2013, at 23:28, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 11:15 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 1/10/2013 1:58 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Hi Craig,
I tend to agree with what you say (or what I understand of it).
Despite my belief that it is possible to extract
On 1/11/2013 8:37 AM, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net
mailto:rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
I don't believe that you can explain perception without God
And how do you explain perception WITH God except by saying God just did it? If the
God theory
On Friday, January 11, 2013 2:02:40 PM UTC-5, yanniru wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Craig Weinberg
whats...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
On Friday, January 11, 2013 12:02:57 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at Roger Clough rcl...@verizon.net wrote:
On 1/11/2013 10:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 10 Jan 2013, at 20:02, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/10/2013 8:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Empirical proofs can be ostensive.
But I prefer not using proof for that. It can only be misleading when we do applied
logic. I prefer to call that empirical
On 1/11/2013 10:31 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
What are its tenets that you believe on faith?
That there is something different from me.
But you have evidence for that - if you can figure out what is meant by me.
I think you need faith to make data into evidence.
That would vitiate the
On 1/11/2013 11:44 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 10 Jan 2013, at 23:28, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 11:15 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 1/10/2013 1:58 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
Hi Craig,
I tend to agree with what you
On 1/11/2013 12:13 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
What we call light is a visual experience. EM radiation below the visible range is felt
as heat. This means that the entirety of the character of the EM is defined by the
receiver-transmitter relation.
That's Feynman-Wheeler emitter/absorber theory
Everett's daughter was right in the sense of a lithothese
(double negation = positive answer) translated into
* I don't want to be WITHOUT my father *
The rest is interpretation.
JM
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 12:14 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote:
**
Reminds me of an old short by Larry Niven,
On Friday, January 11, 2013 4:45:39 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/11/2013 12:13 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
What we call light is a visual experience. EM radiation below the visible
range is felt as heat. This means that the entirety of the character of the
EM is defined by the
On 1/11/2013 2:17 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 11:25 AM, spudboy...@aol.com
mailto:spudboy...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 1/11/2013 2:27:33 AM Eastern Standard Time,
jasonre...@gmail.com
mailto:jasonre...@gmail.com writes:
1) Choose some religion, it
On 1/11/2013 2:25 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Friday, January 11, 2013 4:45:39 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/11/2013 12:13 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
What we call light is a visual experience. EM radiation below the visible
range is
felt as heat. This means that the entirety of
On Friday, January 11, 2013 5:45:19 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/11/2013 2:25 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Friday, January 11, 2013 4:45:39 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 1/11/2013 12:13 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
What we call light is a visual experience. EM radiation below the visible
On 1/11/2013 9:41 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 4:42 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 1/11/2013 2:17 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 11:25 AM, spudboy...@aol.com
mailto:spudboy...@aol.com
wrote:
Book ‘Dreams of a final theory’.
/ By Steven Weinberg. The Nobel Prize in Physics 1979 /
Page 66.
‘ Most scientists use quantum mechanics every day in they
working lives without needing to worry about the fundamental
problem of its interpretation.
. . .they do not worry about it. A year or so
On 1/11/2013 11:35 PM, socra...@bezeqint.net wrote:
Book ‘Dreams of a final theory’.
/ By Steven Weinberg. The Nobel Prize in Physics 1979 /
Page 66.
‘ Most scientists use quantum mechanics every day in they
working lives without needing to worry about the fundamental
problem of its
50 matches
Mail list logo
