On Friday, June 12, 2015 at 9:52:05 PM UTC-7, Bruce wrote:
meekerdb wrote:
On 6/12/2015 6:29 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote:
LizR wrote:
On 12 June 2015 at 17:40, Bruce Kellett bhke...@optusnet.com.au
javascript:
Arithmetic is, after all, only an axiomatic system. We can make up
are preceded by chains of reasons (and your
reference to mathematics) doesn't that infer some form of duality? IOW,
the duality being (a) abstract reasons (that precede causes) and (b) their
complementary realities (effects/events).
Thanks.
Pzomby
--
You received this message because
On Friday, June 8, 2012 1:36:31 PM UTC-7, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Jun 8, 3:00 pm, Pzomby htra...@gmail.com wrote:
Using mathematics, computations and symbols; human embodied
consciousness can (using computers) create models, simulations,
emulations, depictions, replications
Using mathematics, computations and symbols; human embodied
consciousness can (using computers) create models, simulations,
emulations, depictions, replications, representations etc. of
observations of the physical universe and its processes.
This assumes that the actual observable physical
On Saturday, May 26, 2012 7:48:41 AM UTC-7, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 26.05.2012 11:30 Bruno Marchal said the following:
On 26 May 2012, at 08:47, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
In my view, it would be nicer to treat such a question
historically. Your position based on your theorem,
On Mar 7, 5:29 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 06 Mar 2012, at 20:44, Pzomby wrote:
On Mar 6, 10:14 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 06 Mar 2012, at 17:32, meekerdb wrote:
On 3/6/2012 4:26 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
It's a language game.
The word game
Brent
You state: Physical laws are models we make up to explain and predict
the world. Are properties of mathematics then dual, being both
representational (models) and encoded (rules) as instantiated brain
functions?
Mathematics is a subset of language in which propositions are
On Dec 8, 12:20 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 12/8/2011 10:18 AM, Pzomby wrote:
On Dec 7, 10:31 am, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 12/7/2011 8:14 AM, benjayk wrote:
Most materialist just say: Well, the natural laws are just there, without
any particular reason
On Dec 7, 10:31 am, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 12/7/2011 8:14 AM, benjayk wrote:
Most materialist just say: Well, the natural laws are just there, without
any particular reason or meaning behind them, we have to take them for
granted. But this is almost as unconvincing as
Interview of physicist David Deutsch by science journalist John Horgan
http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/3
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To
On Sep 23, 8:41 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Hi Roger,
On 23 Sep 2011, at 07:37, Roger Granet wrote:
Bruno,
Hi. Yes, I am pretty much a materialist/physicalist.
So, you cannot defend the idea that the brain (or whatever responsible
for our consciousness) is
On Aug 1, 5:24 am, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net wrote:
On 7/31/2011 7:40 PM, Pzomby wrote:
The following quote is from the book What is Mathematics Really? by
Reuben Hersh
0 (zero) is particularly nice. It is the class of sets equivalent
to the set of all objects unequal
The following quote is from the book “What is Mathematics Really?” by
Reuben Hersh
“0 (zero) is particularly nice. It is the class of sets equivalent
to the set of all objects unequal to themselves! No object is unequal
to itself, so 0 is the class of all empty sets. But all empty sets
have
not brain/mind/consciousness itself be
subject to the same rules? Are you stating that the rules (laws)
themselves have some kind of dispositional property (like a magnet
with positive and negative attraction poles)?
Thanks
Pzomby
Consider, without space we wouldn't have gone to the Moon
Perhaps if I restate my opinion as:
In my opinion, yes, if in simple terms it is logically correct to
state: A property of “human embodied’ consciousness is….the capacity
and ability of individual ‘human embodied’ consciousness to create
intentionally desired physical and mental effects.
On
On Jun 21, 11:47 am, Rex Allen rexallen31...@gmail.com wrote:
Brain uploading for worms...
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/21/science/21brain.html
The human brain, though vastly more complex than the worm’s, uses many
of the same components, from neuropeptides to transmitters. So
On Mar 5, 1:50 pm, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
On 3/5/2011 7:05 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 Mar 2011, at 19:41, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 3/4/2011 6:13 AM, 1Z wrote:
On Mar 4, 7:57 am, Bruno Marchalmarc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
If you still don't see this,
On Mar 3, 2:07 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 03 Mar 2011, at 02:54, Pzomby wrote:
On Mar 2, 6:03 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 02 Mar 2011, at 05:48, Pzomby wrote:
That is why I limit myself for the TOE to natural numbers and
their
addition
On Mar 2, 6:03 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 02 Mar 2011, at 05:48, Pzomby wrote:
That is why I limit myself for the TOE to natural numbers and their
addition and multiplication.
The reason is that it is enough, by comp, and nobody (except
perhaps
some philosophers
That is why I limit myself for the TOE to natural numbers and their
addition and multiplication.
The reason is that it is enough, by comp, and nobody (except perhaps
some philosophers) have any problem with that.
Yes. A couple of questions from a philosophical point of view:
On Feb 21, 9:11 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 21 Feb 2011, at 13:26, benjayk wrote:
Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 20 Feb 2011, at 00:39, benjayk wrote:
Bruno Marchal wrote:
Isn't it enough to say everything that we *could* describe
in mathematics exists in platonia?
On Nov 30, 10:10 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 30 Nov 2010, at 16:51, Pzomby wrote
On Nov 29, 7:25 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 28 Nov 2010, at 21:18, Pzomby wrote:
On Nov 27, 10:49 am, Rex Allen rexallen31...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010
On Nov 29, 7:25 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 28 Nov 2010, at 21:18, Pzomby wrote:
On Nov 27, 10:49 am, Rex Allen rexallen31...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 7:40 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Rex Allen
On Nov 27, 10:49 am, Rex Allen rexallen31...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 7:40 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Rex Allen rexallen31...@gmail.com wrote:
The same goes for more abstract substrates, like bits of information.
Rex
24 matches
Mail list logo
