Re: Infinities

On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 9:33:23 PM UTC-5, Alan Grayson wrote: > > If there are infinities in mathematics, but not in physics or in nature, > is that a problem? AG > Responses to this question might be entertaining. But the best answer is here: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries

Re: Quantum Foam

On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 8:57:19 PM UTC-5, Alan Grayson wrote: > > > > On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 7:55:15 AM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 8:34:00 AM UTC-5, Alan Grayson wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 1:12:09 AM UTC-6,

Infinities

If there are infinities in mathematics, but not in physics or in nature, is that a problem? AG -- 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-lis

Re: Quantum Foam

On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 7:55:15 AM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 8:34:00 AM UTC-5, Alan Grayson wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 1:12:09 AM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 5:32:23 PM UTC-5

Re: LIGO detections that happened yesterday

On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 5:53:04 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > Yesterday on August 28 2019 LIGO detected 2 Gravitational wave events just > 21 minutes apart, the first at 6:34:05 UTC and the second at 6:55:09 UTC, > the events were at the same distance, 6.4 billion light years, and they

Re: Observation versus assumption

On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 9:28:05 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > > Ito be honest, I have no clue what you mean by “natural number do not > exist”. I can understand that they don’t exist physically, but with > Mechanism, we know that “physical existence” is not a criterium for being

Re: The Mistake about Mary (in the Black and White Room)

It seems a smarter path to go on, siding with materialism, as a floor, improving our scientific equipment, all the time, to measure the universe (telescopes, ligo, accelerators), and letting any other conjecture, such as neoplatonism, see if it can fit in, or catch up? We need never dismiss Car

Re: The Mistake about Mary (in the Black and White Room)

On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 9:06:35 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > I am not sure I understand what you mean by “real matter”, nor which role > it can play for the minds and the souls once we bet on Mechanism. Any > evidence that there exists something like “primitive real matter” woul

Re: Quantum Foam

Gratitude is essential.However, if you don't look for answers out of a fear of displeasing, it blocks future discoveries, re-evaluations, innovations. How is the best and least impudent question to pursue. Also, the Big Mind might be looking to get the species to improve itself, brain-wise.  -

Re: Observation versus assumption

> On 28 Aug 2019, at 21:38, John Clark wrote: > > > How much? > > 42 That is absolutely wrong! Everyone knows that 42 is fiction. (Douglas Adams, Lewis Carroll, etc.) The correct answer is 24 (Ramanujan, Hardy, ..) The real debate is between 3 x 8 or 4 x 6. Now you know the difference betw

Re: Observation versus assumption

> On 28 Aug 2019, at 19:15, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019, 11:36 AM John Clark > wrote: > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 7:45 PM Jason Resch > wrote: > > > You can write a program that outputs the string "2 + 2 = 5", but y

Re: Observation versus assumption

> On 28 Aug 2019, at 20:20, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List > wrote: > > > > On 8/28/2019 8:46 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> How much? If you ask to much on matter for its role in preserving your >> consciousness, it will be no more Turing emulable. >> >> If it remains Turing emulable, th

Re: Observation versus assumption

On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 10:45 AM Bruno Marchal wrote: > > *When we prove that there is no biggest prime number, we don’t make the > prime numbers being infinite. There was no biggest prime number "well > before” Euclid proved it. * > Euclid proved that *IF* numbers have nothing to do with physi

Re: Observation versus assumption

> On 28 Aug 2019, at 21:38, John Clark wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 11:46 AM Bruno Marchal > wrote: > > >> There are 2 attributes that matter has that numbers don't, and I've said > >> this over and over, the ability to change, and the ability to interact >

Re: Observation versus assumption

> On 28 Aug 2019, at 21:21, John Clark wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 1:15 PM Jason Resch > wrote: > > >> And both the Axiom Of Choice and the Continuum Axiom involve infinity and > >> physics has no use for infinity so physics doesn't care if those axioms >

Re: Observation versus assumption

> On 28 Aug 2019, at 20:20, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 10:46:38 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 27 Aug 2019, at 13:31, John Clark > >> wrote: >> > >> yet again to who knows what because I still say "yes" to the digital doctor. >> That's why I neve

Re: The Mistake about Mary (in the Black and White Room)

> On 28 Aug 2019, at 07:32, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 6:01:05 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 26 Aug 2019, at 23:08, Philip Thrift > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Monday, August 26, 2019 at 11:21:28 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 26 Aug 2019,

Re: Quantum Foam

On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 8:34:00 AM UTC-5, Alan Grayson wrote: > > > > On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 1:12:09 AM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 5:32:23 PM UTC-5, Alan Grayson wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Phil, how about your considered opinion of hi

Re: Quantum Foam

On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 1:12:09 AM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 5:32:23 PM UTC-5, Alan Grayson wrote: >> >> >> >> >> Phil, how about your considered opinion of his analysis of virtual >> particles? As Bruce indicated, some scientists are able to pu

LIGO detections that happened yesterday

Yesterday on August 28 2019 LIGO detected 2 Gravitational wave events just 21 minutes apart, the first at 6:34:05 UTC and the second at 6:55:09 UTC, the events were at the same distance, 6.4 billion light years, and they were in the same general part of the sky. The events were seen in all 3 detect

Re: Quantum Foam

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 5:32:23 PM UTC-5, Alan Grayson wrote: > > > > > Phil, how about your considered opinion of his analysis of virtual > particles? As Bruce indicated, some scientists are able to put aside their > religious beliefs in analyzing physical theories. TIA, AG > I su