Re: Suicide Words God and Ideas

On 2/13/2014 8:40 PM, Russell Standish wrote: I had a look at your SANE paper, which is the main paper where you describe your work that you published since your thesis. I can sort of see you saying something a bit like the above on page 11 "Now DU [sic - should be UD in English] is emulated plat

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 04:23:00PM +1300, LizR wrote: > On 14 February 2014 15:40, Russell Standish wrote: > > > > And it implies there was no reality before humans. > > > > If by "human" you mean observers in general, then yes - it does imply > > that. There is no reality without observers. > >

Re: Suicide Words God and Ideas

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 10:42:21AM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 13 Feb 2014, at 05:38, Russell Standish wrote: > > >On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 12:24:18PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> > >>On 12 Feb 2014, at 02:02, Russell Standish wrote: > >> > >>>On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 07:31:24PM +0100, B

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On 14 February 2014 15:40, Russell Standish wrote: > > And it implies there was no reality before humans. > > If by "human" you mean observers in general, then yes - it does imply > that. There is no reality without observers. > > What about the CMBR? When it was created there were (presumably) n

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On 14 February 2014 14:51, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Russell, > > But that assumes that consciousness is prior to ontological reality, to > actual being. That's one of the things I find most ridiculous about both > Bruno's comp and block universes, that they assume everything is 1p > perspectives of

Re: Suicide Words God and Ideas

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 06:07:00PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 13 Feb 2014, at 16:40, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > > > > > > >2014-02-13 16:31 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal : > > > >On 13 Feb 2014, at 12:36, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>>hence

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On 14 February 2014 14:39, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Liz, > > As usual, you are late to the party. > And I see you haven't lost any of your wit and charm. > > The accelerating elevator is in deep space. There are no tidal forces. > The tidal forces are for the non-accelerating elevator resting on

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On Thursday, February 13, 2014 8:51:18 PM UTC-5, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > Russell, > > But that assumes that consciousness is prior to ontological reality, to > actual being. That's one of the things I find most ridiculous about both > Bruno's comp and block universes, that they assume everythi

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

The equivalence principle only works for infinitesimal regions because any gravitational field will vary from point to point, while acceleration is uniform. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and st

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 8:30 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jesse, > > The accelerating floor of an elevator the size of a planet is not "an > infinitesimal neighborhood of a point in spacetime". So that comment of > yours does not apply. > It seems to me it should apply, since you asked "If not doe

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 05:22:50PM -0800, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Russell, > > No, the proper understanding is that gravitation and curved space are > EQUIVALENT. Both are produced by the presence of mass-energy (and stress). In General Relativity, gravitation is not a force, but rather a pseudo-

Re: Block Universes

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 8:15 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jesse, > > You agree "It is true that they both agree on an overview which says > things along the lines of "In frame 1, X is true, in frame 2, Y is true"" > > Presumably what you mean by that is that both A and B agree on (1) A's > calculat

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 05:51:18PM -0800, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Russell, > > But that assumes that consciousness is prior to ontological reality, to > actual being. That's one of the things I find most ridiculous about both > Bruno's comp and block universes, that they assume everything is 1p

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

Russell, But that assumes that consciousness is prior to ontological reality, to actual being. That's one of the things I find most ridiculous about both Bruno's comp and block universes, that they assume everything is 1p perspectives of conscious human observers. To me, that's just solipsism

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

Liz, As usual, you are late to the party. The accelerating elevator is in deep space. There are no tidal forces. The tidal forces of EARTH'S gravitation on the man standing on earth are negligible and can be ignored. They are just the difference in gravitational pull on his head and feet. Of

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

Jesse, The accelerating floor of an elevator the size of a planet is not "an infinitesimal neighborhood of a point in spacetime". So that comment of yours does not apply. And I don't see any tidal forces at play here since the entire floor of the elevator is accelerating 'upward' (just in the

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

Russell, No, the proper understanding is that gravitation and curved space are EQUIVALENT. Both are produced by the presence of mass-energy (and stress). You say "Motion through curved space appears as acceleration in a flat tangent space." Are you saying then that acceleration from a rising e

Re: Block Universes

Jesse, You agree "It is true that they both agree on an overview which says things along the lines of "In frame 1, X is true, in frame 2, Y is true"" Presumably what you mean by that is that both A and B agree on (1) A's calculation of B's t' in A's frame AND (2) B's calculation of A's t in B'

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

Yeah, tidal forces make a measurable difference between the guy on a planet and the accelerating elevator guy. Basically a planet is (more or less) spherical, so the gravity field isn't uniform over the flat floor of hte elevator, but pulls slightly towards the centre of the sphere. With sensitive

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 7:41 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jesse, Brent, Liz, et al, > > Free fall in a gravitational field is NOT acceleration. Standing on the > surface of the earth IS acceleration because only then is the acceleration > of gravity felt as such. > Yes, that's why I equated inerti

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

Jesse, Brent, Liz, et al, Free fall in a gravitational field is NOT acceleration. Standing on the surface of the earth IS acceleration because only then is the acceleration of gravity felt as such. Given that, let me clarify my example: Observer A is standing on the surface of earth. He experi

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On 14 February 2014 13:33, Russell Standish wrote: > On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 12:14:18PM +1300, LizR wrote: > > It seems to me that the situation summarises as follows. > > > > Craig disagrees with the axioms of comp, in particular with "Yes Doctor" > > and hence parts company with Bruno at step 0

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 09:22:18AM -0800, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > All, > > By the Principle of Equivalence acceleration is equivalent to gravitation. > > Gravitation curves space. No - curved space generates the phenomena of gravitation. It is sometimes said that "matter curves space". > > So

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 12:14:18PM +1300, LizR wrote: > It seems to me that the situation summarises as follows. > > Craig disagrees with the axioms of comp, in particular with "Yes Doctor" > and hence parts company with Bruno at step 0. > > Edgar agrees with "Yes Doctor" (because in his view con

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

Brent, Correction. That should be Unruh radiation or the Unruh effect, not Uruh. Edgar On Thursday, February 13, 2014 6:18:00 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > On 2/13/2014 2:55 PM, LizR wrote: > > I didn't really imagine that an acceleration-caused event horizon warps > space (particularly since

Re: Suicide Words God and Ideas

On 14 February 2014 12:46, chris peck wrote: > Hi Liz > > >>Personally, I feel that objections to comp on the basis of what we can > and can't do with our present technology are a bit hair splitting, or > perhaps simply evading the issue. Anyone who has accepted the MWI has > accepted that duplic

RE: Suicide Words God and Ideas

Hi Liz >>Personally, I feel that objections to comp on the basis of what we can and >>can't do with our present technology are a bit hair splitting, or perhaps >>simply evading the issue. Anyone who has accepted the MWI has accepted that >>duplication is possible. my objections were to do wit

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On 2/13/2014 3:27 PM, LizR wrote: On 14 February 2014 12:22, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 2/13/2014 3:01 PM, LizR wrote: On 14 February 2014 11:55, LizR mailto:lizj...@gmail.com>> wrote: I wouldn't imagine that acceleration in itself warps space...? A

Re: Suicide Words God and Ideas

Personally, I feel that objections to comp on the basis of what we can and can't do with our present technology are a bit hair splitting, or perhaps simply evading the issue. Anyone who has accepted the MWI has accepted that duplication is possible. (And anyone who thinks consciousness is digital a

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On 14 February 2014 12:22, meekerdb wrote: > On 2/13/2014 3:01 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 14 February 2014 11:55, LizR wrote: > >> I wouldn't imagine that acceleration in itself warps space...? >> > > Actually I take that back. A pair of neutron stars in close orbit (both > accelerating under thei

Re: Suicide Words God and Ideas

2014-02-13 23:23 GMT+01:00 chris peck : > Hi Quentin > > >> I do not, valid critics are valid, > > By definition mate. > > >> but when you point to someone the inconsistency in his argument and > that he maintains for years the same invalid argument that means that > person does not want to argue,

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On 2/13/2014 3:01 PM, LizR wrote: On 14 February 2014 11:55, LizR mailto:lizj...@gmail.com>> wrote: I wouldn't imagine that acceleration in itself warps space...? Actually I take that back. A pair of neutron stars in close orbit (both accelerating under their mutual gravity) /do/ warp sp

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On 2/13/2014 2:55 PM, LizR wrote: I didn't really imagine that an acceleration-caused event horizon warps space (particularly since it will, I think, generally be a long way from the accelerating observer?) I wouldn't imagine that acceleration in itself warps space...? But I /do /seem to recall

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

It seems to me that the situation summarises as follows. Craig disagrees with the axioms of comp, in particular with "Yes Doctor" and hence parts company with Bruno at step 0. Edgar agrees with "Yes Doctor" (because in his view consciousness is the product of a computation) and hence, if he is go

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On 13 February 2014 08:45, Craig Weinberg wrote: > It's not the concept of prime numbers that is political, its the > assumption that we must agree that they are important to understanding > consciousness. "usually scientists agree with" is political. I would be > more sympathetic with "in spite

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On 14 February 2014 07:23, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Craig, > > I also suspect Bruno's math skills are superior to mine, but his > understanding of the place of math in reality seems pretty deficient, or > perhaps just rigid. > > As I've pointed out his 8 steps may well be mathematically consistent

MSR Schema Diagram

-- 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.c

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On Thursday, February 13, 2014 6:05:34 PM UTC-5, Russell Standish wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 10:23:14AM -0800, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > Craig, > > > > I also suspect Bruno's math skills are superior to mine, but his > > understanding of the place of math in reality seems pretty defici

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On 14 February 2014 11:55, LizR wrote: > I wouldn't imagine that acceleration in itself warps space...? > Actually I take that back. A pair of neutron stars in close orbit (both accelerating under their mutual gravity) *do* warp space, presumably due to their motion. (...I think!) -- You rece

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

I mostly agree Edgar. I would split hairs with you about using the word 'relationships' as a noun for the fundamentals. I see relating as an aspect of sense and sense-making, so that it places the capacity to relate (pansensitivity) as the fundamental. I think you are right about R-bits being i

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 10:23:14AM -0800, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Craig, > > I also suspect Bruno's math skills are superior to mine, but his > understanding of the place of math in reality seems pretty deficient, or > perhaps just rigid. > > As I've pointed out his 8 steps may well be mathemati

Re: Suicide Words God and Ideas

Can the MWI copies ever communicate, e.g. via quantum interference? On 14 February 2014 11:38, chris peck wrote: > Hi Bruno > > >> Come on, the poor guy tried hard since two years, and has convinced > only him > > That's a good way of spinning the fact that for two years it is in reality > you

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

I didn't really imagine that an acceleration-caused event horizon warps space (particularly since it will, I think, generally be a long way from the accelerating observer?) I wouldn't imagine that acceleration in itself warps space...? But I *do *seem to recall that the accel-caused EH emits Hawkin

Re: Nagel on Explanation

On Thursday, February 13, 2014 3:45:23 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: > > On 14 February 2014 00:07, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > >> >> I'm saying that the process can also stop by the inquisitor and the >> answerer both realizing that meaning, life, and aesthetic qualities might >> be unexplainable be

RE: Suicide Words God and Ideas

Hi Bruno >> Come on, the poor guy tried hard since two years, and has convinced only him That's a good way of spinning the fact that for two years it is in reality you who has failed to convince him. All the best Chris From: chris_peck...@hotmail.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subje

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

In this case the horizon is basically just the edge of a light cone, and a continuously-accelerating observer can indefinitely avoid crossing into this light cone (see the top diagram at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rindler_coordinates -- x=0 is the edge of the light cone, while the curve labeled

RE: Suicide Words God and Ideas

Hi Quentin >> I do not, valid critics are valid, By definition mate. >> but when you point to someone the inconsistency in his argument and that he >> maintains for years the same invalid argument that means that person does >> not want to argue, he wants to defend a position at all costs, th

RE: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

-Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2014 1:56 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer? >> The eve

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

The event horizon due to acceleration is just relative to the one accelerated. I doesn't warp space, so there's no reason it should interact with anything. Brent On 2/13/2014 12:41 PM, LizR wrote: Acceleration does cause the formation of an event horizon, I believe, which might be considered

Re: Block Universes

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 4:38 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jesse, > > 4 questions: > > 1. Do you agree that for every relativistic scenario involving 2 > relativistic observers A and B, that relativity provides a description of > how each observes the other's clock time vary relative to their own cl

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On 14 February 2014 10:38, meekerdb wrote: > On 2/13/2014 11:02 AM, Jesse Mazer wrote: > > Even though the curvature disappears in the first order terms, it remains > in the higher order terms, whereas curvature is really zero in all terms > for an accelerating observer in flat spacetime. So, th

Re: Block Universes

Jesse, 4 questions: 1. Do you agree that for every relativistic scenario involving 2 relativistic observers A and B, that relativity provides a description of how each observes the other's clock time vary relative to their own clock? That it provides 2 descriptions, both consistent with relati

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On 2/13/2014 11:02 AM, Jesse Mazer wrote: Even though the curvature disappears in the first order terms, it remains in the higher order terms, whereas curvature is really zero in all terms for an accelerating observer in flat spacetime. So, the answer to your question is that acceleration does n

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On 14 February 2014 10:11, John Mikes wrote: > Liz: the "white rabbit" was an esteemed member of the Everything List in > it's 1st decade. - John > > I believe it has been immortalised in Russell's book, too. (As well as Lewis Carroll's, obviously :) -- You received this message because you ar

Re: MODAL 5 (was Re: Better Than the Chinese Room)

On 14 February 2014 07:49, Bruno Marchal wrote: > Liz, and others, > > > On 13 Feb 2014, at 10:04, LizR wrote: > > On 13 February 2014 21:38, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> If I reported that there was a flying pig, wouldn't comp just explain, >> "That's the way arithmetic looks from inside."? >> >>

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

Congrats! Illustrates how 3-4 wrongs (unknowns?) make a right.(explained). Event horizon - nice. Even if you "couple it". Gravity: a toughy one. I have an explanation so good that nobody repeats it. An 'unexpected way' is unexpected. JM On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 3:41 PM, LizR wrote: > Accelerati

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

PS! I hate grammatical undecisivenesses like what I committed in the previous post to you. I did not mean the "1st decade" of the white rabbit, I meant it of the list. (Habituel newscast English!). JM On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 4:11 PM, John Mikes wrote: > Liz: the "white rabbit" was an esteem

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

Liz: the "white rabbit" was an esteemed member of the Everything List in it's 1st decade. - John On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 3:43 PM, LizR wrote: > On 14 February 2014 07:24, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 2/13/2014 1:04 AM, LizR wrote: >> >> On 13 February 2014 21:38, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> If

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 5:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > My question was "what is the unique consistent definition of "the >>> 1p" after the duplication has been performed?". >>> >> >> >>> In the 3-1 view, that does not exist, >> > > >> Then "the 1p" is of no use to anyone > > > Why? > Beca

Re: Block Universes

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 3:29 PM, LizR wrote: > On 14 February 2014 06:55, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > >> Jesse, >> >> See my proximate response to Liz who asked the same question. Basically >> relativity theory gives you the equations for both frames for any >> relativistic situation. So all you have

Re: Nagel on Explanation

On 14 February 2014 00:07, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > I'm saying that the process can also stop by the inquisitor and the > answerer both realizing that meaning, life, and aesthetic qualities might > be unexplainable because they are all different frequencies (literally, > btw) of the same Absolut

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On 14 February 2014 07:24, meekerdb wrote: > On 2/13/2014 1:04 AM, LizR wrote: > > On 13 February 2014 21:38, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> If I reported that there was a flying pig, wouldn't comp just explain, >> "That's the way arithmetic looks from inside."? >> >> Why? No. Not at all. >> You

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

Acceleration does cause the formation of an event horizon, I believe, which might be considered to couple it with gravity (in an unexpected way). On 14 February 2014 09:33, Jesse Mazer wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > >> Jesse, >> >> Let me think about this, b

Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating

Jeez. Roll on solar power. On 14 February 2014 04:01, Chris de Morsella wrote: > Ground water contamination levels at the sampled well site of 54,000Bq/ > liter > > NHK , Feb. > 13, 2014: *Record cesium level in Fukushima plant groun

Re: Suicide Words God and Ideas

On 14 February 2014 08:56, meekerdb wrote: > > So no matter what is refuted we can save comp by saying that it is true > but at a lower level and what we have observed that appears to refute comp > is a dream or simulation at a higher level. > If this is true, comp isn't a scientific theory. >

Re: Suicide Words God and Ideas

On 14 February 2014 07:26, Richard Ruquist wrote: > The duplication of human beings, such a significant prediction of comp, > should then be amenable to test- using mice of course. > > I don't think comp predicts this. Bruno only uses it as a thought experiment. However if this is a prediction o

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jesse, > > Let me think about this, but it is NOT the observer in "free fall in a > gravitational field" that is equivalent to acceleration. It is an observer > RESISTING free fall (e.g. standing on the surface of the earth) that is > equiva

Re: Block Universes

On 14 February 2014 06:55, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jesse, > > See my proximate response to Liz who asked the same question. Basically > relativity theory gives you the equations for both frames for any > relativistic situation. So all you have to do is do the calculations like > I've explained to

Re: Block Universes

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jesse, > > I haven't seen any book on relativity point this out even though it is > quite obviously what relativity actually does. Do you deny relativity gives > equations for BOTH frames for each single relativistic scenario? That, my > fri

Re: Block Universes

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jesse, > > You still don't get it. > > There is no frame dependent notion of clock time simultaneity in > relativity, but when one compares the 2 frames that relativity uses to > describe a single scenario from both observer frames, one does

Re: Suicide Words God and Ideas

On 2/13/2014 3:29 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 13 Feb 2014, at 12:07, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2014-02-13 11:52 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>>: On 13 Feb 2014, at 09:44, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2014-02-13 9:32 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>>

Re: Suicide Words God and Ideas

On 2/13/2014 2:52 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 13 Feb 2014, at 09:44, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2014-02-13 9:32 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>>: On 12 Feb 2014, at 21:47, LizR wrote: On 13 February 2014 09:18, Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> wrote:

Re: Block Universes

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jesse, > > Depends on what you REALLY mean by the same point in spacetime. > > If you mean the same point in spaceCLOCKtime, then no, because the twins > are NOT at the same point in clock time, though they are at the same point > in space,

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

Jesse, Let me think about this, but it is NOT the observer in "free fall in a gravitational field" that is equivalent to acceleration. It is an observer RESISTING free fall (e.g. standing on the surface of the earth) that is equivalent to acceleration. So please take this into consideration an

Re: Block Universes

Jesse, I haven't seen any book on relativity point this out even though it is quite obviously what relativity actually does. Do you deny relativity gives equations for BOTH frames for each single relativistic scenario? That, my friend, is frame independence Answer to second paragraph. Depe

Re: Block Universes

Jesse, You still don't get it. There is no frame dependent notion of clock time simultaneity in relativity, but when one compares the 2 frames that relativity uses to describe a single scenario from both observer frames, one does get a 1:1 correspondence of which clock times of A's comoving cl

Re: Block Universes

Hi, You're amazing of patience... but I can predict the end, Edgar won't acknowledge anything because he is convince he got it all about relativity, where clearly he doesn't have a clue... he is the perfect example of what crackpotery is... he thinks that flooding a list with BS, will render the BS

Re: Block Universes

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jesse, > > The same reading in the exact same sense that relativity tells us they do > which I've already explained for the nth time. It's in the same frame > independent sense that relativity is able to meaningfully define 2 frames > for an

Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > All, > > By the Principle of Equivalence acceleration is equivalent to gravitation. > Too vague. A more precise statement is that in an observer in free-fall in a gravitational field can define a "local inertial frame" in an infinitesimall

Re: Block Universes

Jesse, The same reading in the exact same sense that relativity tells us they do which I've already explained for the nth time. It's in the same frame independent sense that relativity is able to meaningfully define 2 frames for any 1 relativistic scenario. That gives us the frame independent m

MODAL 5 (was Re: Better Than the Chinese Room)

Liz, and others, On 13 Feb 2014, at 10:04, LizR wrote: On 13 February 2014 21:38, Bruno Marchal wrote: If I reported that there was a flying pig, wouldn't comp just explain, "That's the way arithmetic looks from inside."? Why? No. Not at all. You must (using G & Co.) looks at the way arith

Re: Block Universes

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jesse, > > See my proximate response to Liz who asked the same question. Basically > relativity theory gives you the equations for both frames for any > relativistic situation. So all you have to do is do the calculations like > I've explai

Re: Block Universes

Richard, That's my point exactly. He can't. See my response just posted explaining that in detail. Edgar On Thursday, February 13, 2014 1:46:18 PM UTC-5, yanniru wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Jesse Mazer > > wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Edgar L. Owen

Re: Block Universes

Jesse, Depends on what you REALLY mean by the same point in spacetime. If you mean the same point in spaceCLOCKtime, then no, because the twins are NOT at the same point in clock time, though they are at the same point in space, and are the same point in p-time. But if you define same point i

Re: Block Universes

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > >> Jesse, >> >> See my proximate response to Liz who asked the same question. Basically >> relativity theory gives you the equations for both frames for any >> relativistic situatio

Re: Modal logic 4 (was Re: Suicide Words God and Ideas).

On 2/13/2014 1:10 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: What's the definition of G*? G* is a quite peculiar modal logic. It has as axioms all the theorem of G, + the axiom: []A -> A But is NOT close for the necessitation rule (can you see why that is impossible). This entails that G* has no Kripke seman

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

Craig, I also suspect Bruno's math skills are superior to mine, but his understanding of the place of math in reality seems pretty deficient, or perhaps just rigid. As I've pointed out his 8 steps may well be mathematically consistent but that doesn't mean they have anything to do with the fun

Re: Suicide Words God and Ideas

The duplication of human beings, such a significant prediction of comp, should then be amenable to test- using mice of course. On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > > 2014-02-13 18:07 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal : > > >> On 13 Feb 2014, at 16:40, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >>

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On 2/13/2014 1:04 AM, LizR wrote: On 13 February 2014 21:38, Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> wrote: If I reported that there was a flying pig, wouldn't comp just explain, "That's the way arithmetic looks from inside."? Why? No. Not at all. You must (using G & Co.) lo

Re: Block Universes

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Liz, > > 'Any point' for observers in different frames is well defined by > relativity theory itself. The very fact that relativity theory can provide > 2 equations, one for each separate frame, for any SINGLE relativistic > scenario requir

Re: Suicide Words God and Ideas

2014-02-13 18:07 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal : > > On 13 Feb 2014, at 16:40, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > > > 2014-02-13 16:31 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal : > >> >> On 13 Feb 2014, at 12:36, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> hence F=ma cannot be universaly true if comp is

Re: Block Universes

Jesse, See my proximate response to Liz who asked the same question. Basically relativity theory gives you the equations for both frames for any relativistic situation. So all you have to do is do the calculations like I've explained to you with nearly a dozen examples. To the question in your

Re: Block Universes

Liz, 'Any point' for observers in different frames is well defined by relativity theory itself. The very fact that relativity theory can provide 2 equations, one for each separate frame, for any SINGLE relativistic scenario requires that to be true. That is what I've continually pointed out to

How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?

All, By the Principle of Equivalence acceleration is equivalent to gravitation. Gravitation curves space. So doesn't this mean acceleration should also curve space? If not, why not? If not, doesn't that violate the Equivalence Principle? If so what is the geometric form of that curvature relat

Re: Suicide Words God and Ideas

On 13 Feb 2014, at 16:40, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2014-02-13 16:31 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal : On 13 Feb 2014, at 12:36, Quentin Anciaux wrote: hence F=ma cannot be universaly true if comp is true. So if you extract "F= KmM/r^2" from comp, and you refute it ostensibly (by f

Re: Suicide Words God and Ideas

2014-02-13 16:31 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal : > > On 13 Feb 2014, at 12:36, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > > > 2014-02-13 12:29 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal : > >> >> On 13 Feb 2014, at 12:07, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >> >> >> >> 2014-02-13 11:52 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal : >> >>> >>> On 13 Feb 2014, at 09:4

Re: Suicide Words God and Ideas

On 13 Feb 2014, at 12:36, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2014-02-13 12:29 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal : On 13 Feb 2014, at 12:07, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2014-02-13 11:52 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal : On 13 Feb 2014, at 09:44, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2014-02-13 9:32 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal : On 1

RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating

Ground water contamination levels at the sampled well site of 54,000Bq/ liter NHK , Feb. 13, 2014: Record cesium level in Fukushima plant groundwater - [Tepco] says water samples taken from a newly-dug well contained the highest levels

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 9:30:25 PM UTC-5, stathisp wrote: > > On 12 February 2014 23:47, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > > >> > I don't think that my experience can be replaced with a copy though. > >> > >> So how would you know you were a copy? > > > > > > It has nothing to do with wh

Re: Suicide Words God and Ideas

2014-02-13 12:29 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal : > > On 13 Feb 2014, at 12:07, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > > > 2014-02-13 11:52 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal : > >> >> On 13 Feb 2014, at 09:44, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >> >> >> >> 2014-02-13 9:32 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal : >> >>> >>> On 12 Feb 2014, at 21:47

  1   2   >