Re: Entanglement

On Tuesday, June 5, 2018 at 1:18:29 AM UTC, Bruce wrote: > > From: > > > > Remember that the analysis I have given above is schematic, representing > the general progression of unitary evolution. It is not specific to any > particular case, or any particular number of possible outcomes for the

Re: Entanglement

> Il 5 giugno 2018 alle 5.05 Bruce Kellett ha > scritto: > > From: mailto:agrayson2...@gmail.com > > > > > > > On Tuesday, June 5, 2018 at 1:18:29 AM UTC, Bruce wrote: > > > > > > > From: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Re: Entanglement

On Tuesday, June 5, 2018 at 3:05:40 AM UTC, Bruce wrote: > > From: > > > > On Tuesday, June 5, 2018 at 1:18:29 AM UTC, Bruce wrote: >> >> From: >> >> >> Remember that the analysis I have given above is schematic, representing >> the general progression of unitary evolution. It is not specific

Re: Entanglement

On Tuesday, June 5, 2018 at 3:25:25 AM UTC, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Monday, June 4, 2018 at 4:26:45 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 3 Jun 2018, at 23:37, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 3:15:13 PM UTC, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>> >>>

Re: Entanglement

On Monday, June 4, 2018 at 4:26:45 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 3 Jun 2018, at 23:37, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 3:15:13 PM UTC, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 1:05:48 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 2 Jun

Re: Entanglement

From: mailto:agrayson2...@gmail.com>> On Tuesday, June 5, 2018 at 1:18:29 AM UTC, Bruce wrote: From: Remember that the analysis I have given above is schematic, representing the general progression of unitary evolution. It is not specific to any particular case, or any partic

Re: Primary matter

On 6/4/2018 4:39 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 02:48:01PM -0700, Brent Meeker wrote: It's a necessary feature of intelligence.  Intelligence requires "what-if" modeling of situations in order to foresee consequences. Even a the lower animal level this implies modeling on

Re: Entanglement

On Tuesday, June 5, 2018 at 2:02:49 AM UTC, John Clark wrote: > > On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 12:50 AM, > > wrote: > > > *> when decoherence or the MWI implies the creation of full-blown worlds > (that we can't observe), there seems to be a large body of opinion that > accepts this bizarre resul

Re: Entanglement

On Tuesday, June 5, 2018 at 1:18:29 AM UTC, Bruce wrote: > > From: > > > > Remember that the analysis I have given above is schematic, representing > the general progression of unitary evolution. It is not specific to any > particular case, or any particular number of possible outcomes for the

Re: Entanglement

On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 12:50 AM, wrote: > *> when decoherence or the MWI implies the creation of full-blown worlds > (that we can't observe), there seems to be a large body of opinion that > accepts this bizarre result without serious criticism that there's no > mechanism or process for creatin

Re: Primary matter

On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 03:50:33PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > You seem to confuse arithmetical realism, used in all branches of science, > and Platonism (which is part of the consequence). To define mathematically > what a computation is, we need arithmetical realism. In SANE04, my definiti

Re: Primary matter

From: *Bruno Marchal* mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> You seem to confuse arithmetical realism, used in all branches of science, and Platonism (which is part of the consequence). To define mathematically what a computation is, we need arithmetical realism. In SANE04, my definition is redundant bec

Re: Entanglement

From: mailto:agrayson2...@gmail.com>> Remember that the analysis I have given above is schematic, representing the general progression of unitary evolution. It is not specific to any particular case, or any particular number of possible outcomes for the experiment. Bruce *OK. For economy w

Re: Primary matter

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 7:07 PM, Russell Standish wrote: > >> ​>​ >> Free-will is NOT *often* described that way, I have but I've never heard >> ​ >> anyone else do so; > > > ​> ​ > I'm _sure_ you've heard me describe it that way. It's in my book. ​I'm glad to hear I'm not alone!​ > ​> ​ > My

Re: Primary matter

On 6/4/2018 4:07 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 01:12:57PM -0400, John Clark wrote: ​>* ​* *Free-will is often defined by an ability to do something randomly, * Free-will is NOT *often* described that way, I have but I've never heard anyone else do so; I'm _sure_ you'v

Re: Primary matter

On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 02:48:01PM -0700, Brent Meeker wrote: > > It's a necessary feature of intelligence.  Intelligence requires "what-if" > modeling of situations in order to foresee consequences. Even a the lower > animal level this implies modeling oneself in the simulation. In higher, > soci

Re: Primary matter

On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 01:12:57PM -0400, John Clark wrote: > > ​>* ​* > > *Free-will is often defined by an ability to do something randomly, * > > > Free-will is NOT *often* described that way, I have but I've never heard > anyone else do so; I'm _sure_ you've heard me describe it that way. It

Re: Entanglement

From: On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 2:23:46 AM UTC, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Saturday, May 26, 2018 at 12:06:53 AM UTC, Bruce wrote: >> >> From: > >> On Wednesday, May 23, 2018 at 8:16:07 AM UTC, Bruce wrote: >>> >>> From: >> >>> OK, but how does one jump to the assumption of other worl

Re: Primary matter

On 6/4/2018 7:13 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: I am very grateful for mother medicine, but we should not pretend that its operative assumptions solve the fundamental questions. What fundamental question do you refer to? How to detect consciousness? How to produce consciousness? How to prove (in t

Re: Primary matter

On 6/4/2018 6:50 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: There is not one argument here. You seem to confuse arithmetical realism, used in all branches of science, and Platonism (which is part of the consequence). To define mathematically what a computation is, we need arithmetical realism. Science doe

Re: Primary matter

On 6/4/2018 3:13 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: Most scientists and scientifically-literate people I know assume that consciousness emerges from brain activity without ever really thinking about the ramifications of this hypothesis. I have had this conversation several times, and I can usually tell

Re: Primary matter

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 10:38 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​> *​* > * From -500 to +500, theology has progressed a lot.* > ​ I'd like to see some examples of that. Religion didn't progress logically it just got dumber. Moses didn't claim to be God, Jesus did. And the entire crucifixion thing is comic

Re: Entanglement

> On 3 Jun 2018, at 23:37, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 3:15:13 PM UTC, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > > On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 1:05:48 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 2 Jun 2018, at 00:23, agrays...@gmail.com <> wrote: >> >> On Friday, June 1, 2

Re: Primary matter

> On 3 Jun 2018, at 21:56, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > > On 6/3/2018 3:40 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >> On 1 June 2018 at 19:41, Brent Meeker wrote: >>> >>> On 6/1/2018 12:15 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On 31 May 2018 at 19:57, Brent Meeker wrote: > > On 5/31/2018 2:06 AM, Telmo Men

Re: Primary matter

> On 3 Jun 2018, at 20:40, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > On 2 June 2018 at 17:10, John Clark wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 3:15 AM, Telmo Menezes >> wrote: >> >> I'd like to see Bruno actually quote some well known philosophers or >> scientist using the term. >>> >>> >>> Materi

Re: Is the Continuum Hypothesis a) really true or really false, or b) something else ?

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 6:14 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​>>​ >> There is absolutely nothing unique about that silly personal diary of >> yours and there is nothing unique about your memories either because >> because YOU HAVE BEEN DUPLICATED and that is what the word "duplicated" >> means. > > > ​>

Re: Primary matter

> On 2 Jun 2018, at 17:10, John Clark wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 3:15 AM, Telmo Menezes > wrote: > > >> I'd like to see Bruno actually quote some well known philosophers or > >> scientist using the term. > > > Materialism vs. Idealism is one of the olde

Re: Primary matter

On 3 June 2018 at 23:01, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > On 6/3/2018 4:10 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >> >> On 1 June 2018 at 22:37, Brent Meeker wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 6/1/2018 7:49 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > Physical theories of the brain, based on extensive empirical research, > have >

Re: Primary matter

> On 1 Jun 2018, at 19:41, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > > On 6/1/2018 12:15 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >> On 31 May 2018 at 19:57, Brent Meeker wrote: >>> >>> On 5/31/2018 2:06 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: You're a bit naughty Brent. You sometimes use this maneuver of nonchalantly li

Re: Primary matter

> On 1 Jun 2018, at 14:35, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > From: Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> >>> On 1 Jun 2018, at 11:46, Bruce Kellett < >>> bhkell...@optusnet.com.au >>> > wrote: >>> >>> From: Bruno Marchal mailto:mar

Re: Primary matter

On 3 June 2018 at 21:56, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > On 6/3/2018 3:40 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >> >> On 1 June 2018 at 19:41, Brent Meeker wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 6/1/2018 12:15 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On 31 May 2018 at 19:57, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > On 5/31/2018 2:06 AM, Te

Re: Is the Continuum Hypothesis a) really true or really false, or b) something else ?

> On 3 Jun 2018, at 22:36, John Clark wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 9:33 AM, Bruno Marchal > wrote: > > >> If you believe that is not possible then you must believe the most > >> important part of us is supernatural and can not be duplicated because it > >> is n