Re: 3-1 views (was: Re: Better Than the Chinese Room)

On 18 Feb 2014, at 19:52, John Clark wrote: On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 3:33 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> if Mr. he is the fellow who is experiencing Helsinki right now then the correct prediction would be Mr. he will see neither Washington NOR Moscow. > Simple calculus show that this pr

Re: 3-1 views

2014-02-19 1:21 GMT+01:00 meekerdb : > On 2/17/2014 10:25 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > > > 2014-02-18 3:35 GMT+01:00 meekerdb : > >> On 2/17/2014 5:57 PM, David Nyman wrote: >> >> On 17 February 2014 20:15, meekerdb wrote: >> >>>But it is unambiguous under comp ex hypothesi: i.e. any c

Re: Block Universes

On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 9:40 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jesse, > > OK, I'm back... > > Let me back up a minute and ask you a couple of general questions with > respect to establishing which past clock times of different observers were > simultaneous in p-time > > The only clocks in this examp

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On 2/18/2014 4:58 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 04:19:33PM -0800, meekerdb wrote: On 2/17/2014 10:15 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 09:18:32PM -0800, meekerdb wrote: I don't think there's any difference between objectivity and inter-subujective agreem

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

On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:28 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > >> >> >> You say that "You can tell if spacetime is curved or not by observing >>> if light moves in a straight line or not." and then you say that light does >>> NOT travel in a straigh

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

On 2/18/2014 4:30 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 11:57:21AM +1300, LizR wrote: On 19/02/2014, Russell Standish wrote: In which theory? IIUC, acceleration of an infinitesimal point particle does not change the curvature of space. And acceleration of a massive particle only

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 03:42:48AM +, chris peck wrote: > >>how can facts exist that are not grounded in observation at some point? > > Russell and Liz are wandering around the countryside and Liz points at the > ground and says: > > "there's a gold coin buried right there." > > Russell say

Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating

If it had been a liquid salt type thorium reactor as prototyped at Oak Ridge in the 50's, it could not have happened. The thorium salt is a solid at room temperature and is not water soluble. Brent On 2/18/2014 2:50 PM, LizR wrote: Would this have happened if Japan had been using subcritical

RE: What are numbers? What is math?

>>how can facts exist that are not grounded in observation at some point? Russell and Liz are wandering around the countryside and Liz points at the ground and says: "there's a gold coin buried right there." Russell says: "no there isn't" They both walk on without looking. And in the subseque

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 02:34:57PM +1300, LizR wrote: > On 19/02/2014, Russell Standish wrote: > > > > Which ones? How can unobserved facts exist? > > You can observe their consequences without observing the facts. E.g. > millions of people have observed that the sun shines without > understandin

Re: Cool Cuttlefish footage

On Saturday, February 15, 2014 10:16:19 PM UTC, Brent wrote: > > On 2/15/2014 2:17 PM, Russell Standish wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 11:08:07AM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 14 Feb 2014, at 20:47, meekerdb wrote: > >> > >>> On 2/14/2014 7:12 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > >>

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On 19/02/2014, Russell Standish wrote: > > Which ones? How can unobserved facts exist? You can observe their consequences without observing the facts. E.g. millions of people have observed that the sun shines without understanding or knowing about nuclear fusion. But maybe you mean how can facts

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

Russell, and Brent, Well, yes and no. At the first level I do claim an objective external reality. But that that objective external reality consists only of computationally evolving information continually computing the current state of the universe. It is not the familiar classical world in wh

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 04:57:04PM -0800, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > Thus the notion of an external reality IS consistent with it being a > computational reality, because it leads directly to it. > > Edgar > So you have just painted yourself into a Platonic idealist corner. The only ontological

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On 19 February 2014 01:09, Russell Standish wrote: Anyway, hopefully I can get to that paper so that we can discuss this more. I look forward to it :) David -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group a

Re: How Wolves Change Rivers

On 18 February 2014 17:14, Craig Weinberg wrote: Moreover, that very failure must be strikingly apparent to the functional >> actors themselves. >> > > Why do you think that isn't the pathetic fallacy though? > Quite simply because the whole argument is based on the premise that the computationa

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 12:39:59AM +, David Nyman wrote: > On 19 February 2014 00:15, Russell Standish wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:22:55PM +, David Nyman wrote: > > > On 18 February 2014 22:34, Russell Standish > > wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 02:06:37PM +,

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

Russell, and Liz, Depends on what we mean by "an objective physical reality". Actually an external objective reality is one of the several most convincing arguments FOR a computational reality. An external reality, as opposed to the internal realities of our individual simulations of that real

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 04:19:33PM -0800, meekerdb wrote: > On 2/17/2014 10:15 PM, Russell Standish wrote: > >On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 09:18:32PM -0800, meekerdb wrote: > > I don't think there's any difference between objectivity and > inter-subujective agreement. I tend to use them interchangabl

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On 19 February 2014 00:15, Russell Standish wrote: > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:22:55PM +, David Nyman wrote: > > On 18 February 2014 22:34, Russell Standish > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 02:06:37PM +, David Nyman wrote: > > > > > > > > I must admit it hasn't been entirely cle

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

On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 11:57:21AM +1300, LizR wrote: > On 19/02/2014, Russell Standish wrote: > > > > In which theory? IIUC, acceleration of an infinitesimal point particle > > does not change the curvature of space. And acceleration of a massive > > particle only changes the curvature by the amo

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

On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 9:44:58 PM UTC, Russell Standish wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 01:28:09PM -0500, John Clark wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Edgar L. Owen > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> You say that "You can tell if spacetime is curved or not by > observing

Re: 3-1 views

On 2/17/2014 10:25 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2014-02-18 3:35 GMT+01:00 meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>>: On 2/17/2014 5:57 PM, David Nyman wrote: On 17 February 2014 20:15, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: But it is unambiguous under comp ex hypothesi: i

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On 2/17/2014 10:15 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 09:18:32PM -0800, meekerdb wrote: On 2/17/2014 8:58 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 07:30:23PM -0800, meekerdb wrote: But there is a weaker form. However unlikely one thinks strings or singularities or

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:22:55PM +, David Nyman wrote: > On 18 February 2014 22:34, Russell Standish wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 02:06:37PM +, David Nyman wrote: > > > > > > I must admit it hasn't been entirely clear to me why you decided that the > > > MGA can go through without

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

Ah - interesting. Despite being on a short holiday in the Bay of Islands I have TON with me (and "Confederacy of Dunces") so I can check that out. As far as the evidence not being in favour of what people think, I guess that is because they simply assume objective reality, much as lots of people a

Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating

On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:33:19 PM UTC, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > Ghibbsa, > > I tend to agree, if nuclear reactors are just built to the high safety > standards they need to be. Quite obviously they should be built to > automatically shut down safely, rather than having melt downs. > > In

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 12:06:30PM +1300, LizR wrote: > Surely you need something to synchronise the perceptions of different > observers? And I assume external physical reality is the simplest > hypothesis for what that something is? > > Not that that ia an argument in its favour, I suppose (does

Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating

Ghibbsa, I tend to agree, if nuclear reactors are just built to the high safety standards they need to be. Quite obviously they should be built to automatically shut down safely, rather than having melt downs. In general the aggregate risks of nuclear power are less than comparable amounts of

Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating

On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 10:50:19 PM UTC, Liz R wrote: > > Would this have happeed if Japan had been using subcritical reactors > with thorium fuel? > It's worth asking. I don't know the answer but if half the promise were half true for Thorium it'd be pretty hard to accept the risk port

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On 18 February 2014 22:34, Russell Standish wrote: On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 02:06:37PM +, David Nyman wrote: > > > > I must admit it hasn't been entirely clear to me why you decided that the > > MGA can go through without addressing the counterfactuals, especially > since > > Maudlin felt he h

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

Surely you need something to synchronise the perceptions of different observers? And I assume external physical reality is the simplest hypothesis for what that something is? Not that that ia an argument in its favour, I suppose (doesn't make testable predictions different from other ontologies).

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

On 19/02/2014, Russell Standish wrote: > > In which theory? IIUC, acceleration of an infinitesimal point particle > does not change the curvature of space. And acceleration of a massive > particle only changes the curvature by the amount due to the increased > kinetic energy of the particle. Acce

Re: Cool Cuttlefish footage

On Sunday, February 16, 2014 10:23:27 AM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 15 Feb 2014, at 23:17, Russell Standish wrote: > > > On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 11:08:07AM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> > >> On 14 Feb 2014, at 20:47, meekerdb wrote: > >> > >>> On 2/14/2014 7:12 AM, Platonist Guitar

Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating

On 19/02/2014, ghib...@gmail.com wrote: > > I'm over-compensating in the other direction a bit here. Not because I love > > the bomb, but if you only knew the power of the dark side. > Come ... join us... Don't be afraid... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google G

Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating

Would this have happened if Japan had been using subcritical reactors with thorium fuel? On 19/02/2014, ghib...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Thursday, February 13, 2014 3:01:26 PM UTC, cdemorsella wrote: >> >> Ground water contamination levels at the sampled well site of 54,000Bq/ >> liter >> >> NHK <

Re: Cool Cuttlefish footage

On Friday, February 14, 2014 7:47:27 PM UTC, Brent wrote: > > On 2/14/2014 7:12 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > > Some members of the list have expressed fondness or interest for > cuttlefish, which is > > why I post this link: > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgdVVU8tBTQ > > >

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 02:06:37PM +, David Nyman wrote: > > I must admit it hasn't been entirely clear to me why you decided that the > MGA can go through without addressing the counterfactuals, especially since > Maudlin felt he had to address them in his alternative formulation. I > appreci

Re: Cool Cuttlefish footage

On Friday, February 14, 2014 3:12:56 PM UTC, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > > Some members of the list have expressed fondness or interest for > cuttlefish, which is why I post this link: > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgdVVU8tBTQ > > The documentary is a bit sensational/over the top at ti

Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating

On Thursday, February 13, 2014 3:01:26 PM UTC, cdemorsella wrote: > > Ground water contamination levels at the sampled well site of 54,000Bq/ > liter > > NHK , Feb. > 13, 2014: *Record cesium level in Fukushima plant groundwater* — [T

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

On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 01:28:09PM -0500, John Clark wrote: > On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > > > > >> You say that "You can tell if spacetime is curved or not by observing > >> if light moves in a straight line or not." and then you say that light does > >> NOT travel

Re: 3-1 views (was: Re: Better Than the Chinese Room)

Yes this appears to be an argument against the MWI. If there is a problem with people being duplicated (I can't see what it is myself) then obviously it applies to the MWI. On 19/02/2014, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > 2014-02-18 19:52 GMT+01:00 John Clark : > >> >> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 3:33 AM, Bru

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

On 19/02/2014, John Clark wrote: > > No, the curvature of both is equally fundamental and equally real. However > it is true that General Relativity talks about a particular type of > acceleration called "Proper Acceleration", it is the acceleration of > something relative to an observer in free f

Re: 3-1 views (was: Re: Better Than the Chinese Room)

2014-02-18 19:52 GMT+01:00 John Clark : > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 3:33 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > >> if Mr. he is the fellow who is experiencing Helsinki right now then the >>> correct prediction would be Mr. he will see neither Washington NOR Moscow. >>> >> >> > Simple calculus show that thi

Re: 3-1 views (was: Re: Better Than the Chinese Room)

On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 3:33 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> if Mr. he is the fellow who is experiencing Helsinki right now then the >> correct prediction would be Mr. he will see neither Washington NOR Moscow. >> > > > Simple calculus show that this prediction will be refuted by both > copies. > Bu

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

On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > >> You say that "You can tell if spacetime is curved or not by observing >> if light moves in a straight line or not." and then you say that light does >> NOT travel in a straight line in the accelerating elevator example you give. >> > >

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On 18 Feb 2014, at 15:06, David Nyman wrote: On 17 February 2014 17:46, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 17 Feb 2014, at 14:13, David Nyman wrote: On 16 February 2014 16:17, Bruno Marchal wrote: The whole schema - "physics" included - would then have to be considered an epiphenomenon of some inac

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On 17 February 2014 06:07, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > On 17 February 2014 08:39, meekerdb wrote: > > On 2/16/2014 5:14 PM, David Nyman wrote: > > > > On 17 February 2014 00:12, meekerdb wrote: > > > >> I don't think so. We know where the values of the Mars Rover are > encoded > >> and how th

Re: 3-1 views (was: Re: Better Than the Chinese Room)

On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 17 Feb 2014, at 19:49, John Clark wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> > what exactly is the question? Be specific and DON'T HIDE BEHIND >>> PRONOUNS WITH NO CLEAR REFERENT. >>> >> >> >The question

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On 17 February 2014 17:46, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 17 Feb 2014, at 14:13, David Nyman wrote: > > On 16 February 2014 16:17, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> The whole schema - "physics" included - would then have to be >> considered an epiphenomenon of some inaccessible ur-physics. >> >> Exactly.

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On Monday, February 17, 2014 10:30:23 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > On 2/17/2014 7:09 PM, Russell Standish wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 06:32:35PM -0800, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 2/17/2014 5:21 PM, Russell Standish wrote: > >>> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 02:03:49PM -0800, meekerdb wrote: > >>>

Re: How Wolves Change Rivers

On 18 February 2014 03:42, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > I have over and over. If I count my fingers, I get a number five. That > number cannot reproduce the individual fingers and thumb of my hand. It's > just a metaphor for a certain set of qualities associated with feeling and > seeing my han

Re: 3-1 views

On 18 February 2014 02:35, meekerdb wrote: On 2/17/2014 5:57 PM, David Nyman wrote: > > On 17 February 2014 20:15, meekerdb wrote: > >>But it is unambiguous under comp ex hypothesi: i.e. any classically >> adequate copy of me is equivalent to me. Under this hypothesis if I am >> duplicated

Re: What are numbers? What is math?

On 17 Feb 2014, at 17:34, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Hi Richard, Yes, that is a good example. R-computations, the R-math computations that actual compute the current information state of the universe, never have a halting problem because they are a program that always simply computes the next

Re: 3-1 views (was: Re: Better Than the Chinese Room)

On 17 Feb 2014, at 19:49, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > what exactly is the question? Be specific and DON'T HIDE BEHIND PRONOUNS WITH NO CLEAR REFERENT. >The question is what do you [blah blah] DON'T HIDE BEHIND PRONOUNS WITH NO CLEAR REFER