Re: Consciousness

forward, presumably you've done some research > on it, why should I have to duplicate it? > > You obviously don't have anything here, I'm sorry I bothered to be open > minded about it since you're clearly just a charlatan. > > On 11 December 2014 at 14:28, Richard Ruq

Re: Consciousness

You can do your own research. On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 7:15 PM, LizR wrote: > On 11 December 2014 at 11:34, Richard Ruquist wrote: > >> She is at Smith College. Go for it >> > > If that's the only response to a request for peer-reviewed papers, I think > we

Re: Consciousness

She is at Smith College. Go for it On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 5:00 PM, LizR wrote: > On 10 December 2014 at 20:00, Richard Ruquist wrote: > >> That's the slide I meant. The first item has to do with the (mostly ) >> elderly who get serious dementia >> and essenti

Re: real A.I.

I do not doubt that increased CO2 in the atm causes global warming and that nowadays much of it comes from burning fossil fuels. Yet my opinion of the Vostok ice core data is that when global temperatures got to their present levels, rapid global warming abruptly turned into less rapid global cool

Re: Consciousness

That's the slide I meant. The first item has to do with the (mostly ) elderly who get serious dementia and essentially cannot communicate. They speak nonsense or not at all. >From autopsies after they die their brains are established to be almost completely destroyed. Yet just before they die, fro

Re: Consciousness

s can exist outside of the brain. > > > > > -Original Message- > From: LizR > To: everything-list > Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 6:04 pm > Subject: Re: Consciousness > > Sounds interesting. I wish I had an hour to watch it. I don't suppose > there&

Re: Consciousness

Liz, His first slide summarizes to entire talk. The rest are examples and elaboration. Richard On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 6:03 PM, LizR wrote: > Sounds interesting. I wish I had an hour to watch it. I don't suppose > there's a summary? :-) > > On 10 December 2014 at 03:36,

Fwd: Consciousness

-- Forwarded message -- From: richard ruquist Date: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 9:26 AM Subject: Consciousness To: Swines , " achristianvsatheistc...@yahoogroups.com" < achristianvsatheistc...@yahoogroups.com>, Richard Ruquist https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yos

Re: real A.I.

On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > Hi Richard, > > > > On 07 Dec 2014, at 15:16, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > Bruno, > > You seem to be arguing that the total energy in the multiverse is a > constant. > Is that so? > > > > I think

Re: real A.I.

Bruno, You seem to be arguing that the total energy in the multiverse is a constant. Is that so? Richard On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 6:20 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 06 Dec 2014, at 12:59, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 3:19 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > &g

Re: real A.I.

On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 3:19 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 05 Dec 2014, at 20:04, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > What I want to know is if anyone takes conservation of energy seriously? > > > Yes. Quantum mechanics without collapse does not violate the conservation > of ene

Re: real A.I.

What I want to know is if anyone takes conservation of energy seriously? On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 1:49 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/5/2014 8:20 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > > > On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 8:06 AM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/4/2014 8:05 PM, LizR wrote: >> >>> I suspect that Bruno is di

Re: Is Dark Energy Gobbling Dark Matter, and Slowing Universe's Expansion?

Zibby, They may be interested, but they cannot publish such an interest and put their careers at risk. It is only emeritus types like myself that can put such speculations in print. What they can publish is the math behind the limited conclusion. David Deutsch is the exception. Zappy On Sun, Nov

Re: Is Dark Energy Gobbling Dark Matter, and Slowing Universe's Expansion?

That is exactly the same kind of correlation that Motl, Gharibyon, Penna and I are talking about. It is a form of cosmic entanglement. However, if you recall I extrapolated from G&P's paper that black holes must be intelligent to be monogamus. And in a post to Bruno I speculated the particle wave

Re: Is Dark Energy Gobbling Dark Matter, and Slowing Universe's Expansion?

I have read that reference. It is obvious that you have not. But then almost everything you post here is baloney. So it may not matter if you read the paper or not. Richard On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 9:25 PM, wrote: > > > On Monday, December 1, 2014 2:14:33 AM UTC, yanniru wrote: >> >> I posted a r

Re: Is Dark Energy Gobbling Dark Matter, and Slowing Universe's Expansion?

I posted a reference here that suggested how distant black holes could become correlated. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1308.0289v1.pdf Richard On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 9:07 PM, wrote: > > > On Monday, December 1, 2014 1:48:35 AM UTC, Liz R wrote: >> >> OK, I'm just curious to knowI don't know what pl

Re: Quantum Mechanics Violation of the Second Law

John, Experimental results at several high-energy colliders suggest that at some point in the big bang the universe was a quark-gluon plasma, which despite it's high energy, is a BEC where all the particles share the same wave function- so they say. It seems to me that if all particles in the univ

Re: Edge: Myth of A.I.

On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 3:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > Richard, > > On 28 Nov 2014, at 19:19, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > It occurred to me that if consciousness is entirely classical- no quantum > effects- then perhaps consciousness on occurs in one world. Or in general

Re: Edge: Myth of A.I.

It may just be herding instinct or projection on my part, but it seems that my chickens are more intelligent as a group than individually. I attribute that to a group mind due to entanglement in a mind/matter duality. Richard On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Kim Jones wrote: > > > > > On 29 Nov

Re: Is Dark Energy Gobbling Dark Matter, and Slowing Universe's Expansion?

I have wondered if space is expanding by adding on more space, keeping the space of say our galaxy intact. Or is the actual space within our galaxy getting bigger, along with each of us. And if the latter, how would we know.? Richard On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > LizR w

Re: Edge: Myth of A.I.

Bruno, It occurred to me that if consciousness is entirely classical- no quantum effects- then perhaps consciousness on occurs in one world. Or in general if most natural processes are classical, then we are mostly in one world, maybe with a little fuzziness. Richard On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 11:37

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

:46 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 25 Nov 2014, at 17:54, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 7:17 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> On 24 Nov 2014, at 16:58, Richard Ruquist wrote: >> >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 9:4

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 7:17 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 24 Nov 2014, at 16:58, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> On 24 Nov 2014, at 11:35, Richard Ruquist wrote: >> >> >> >&

Re: Is Dark Energy Gobbling Dark Matter, and Slowing Universe's Expansion?

The article was about the bad fit. On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 5:58 PM, LizR wrote: > On 25 November 2014 at 11:53, Richard Ruquist wrote: > >> The continuing tests have been done. The results are in. That is what the >> article is about. >> >> I only saw ref

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 2:08 AM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > meekerdb wrote: > >> >> ISTM there are two ways of looking at it. In one you say before the >> event there were several possibilities x,y,z,... with probabilites >> a,b,c,... and one of them, x, happened. The energy before x was the same >

Re: Is Dark Energy Gobbling Dark Matter, and Slowing Universe's Expansion?

The continuing tests have been done. The results are in. That is what the article is about. On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 5:32 PM, LizR wrote: > Shouldn't this be testable? If DM is disappearing then galaxies should be > expanding as there is less mass holding them together, surely? (And large > scale

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 5:42 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > Richard Ruquist wrote: > >> Wrong. Renormalization multiples the total energy in the multiverse. >> > > I can do no more than refer you to Frank Wilczek: > > http://frankwilczek.com/2013/multiverseEnergy01.p

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

Wrong. Renormalization multiples the total energy in the multiverse. On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > Richard Ruquist wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Bruce Kellett > <mailto:bhkell...@optusnet.com.au>>

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 24 Nov 2014, at 11:35, Richard Ruquist wrote: >> >> With MWI thinking, every detector will detect a photon at the same >>> energy and frequency as the original photon but in a

Re: Is Dark Energy Gobbling Dark Matter, and Slowing Universe's Expansion?

Isn't this news a few months old? On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 2:05 PM, wrote: > http://www.space.com/27852-dark-energy-eating-dark-matter.html > > my comment is testimony. my worldview predicted this. honest. > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ev

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 24 Nov 2014, at 11:35, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 4:05 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> On 23 Nov 2014, at 18:11, Richard Ruquist wrote: >> >> Bruno: I do

Re: Can we test for parallel worlds?

MWI renormalization is just a snooker. On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 6:51 AM, wrote: > > > On Sunday, November 23, 2014 9:52:23 AM UTC, Bruce wrote: >> >> LizR wrote: >> > On 22 November 2014 09:31, Richard Ruquist > > <mailto:yan...@gmail.com>> wrote: &g

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 4:05 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 23 Nov 2014, at 18:11, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > Bruno: I doubt a photon needs to double his energy to go through two > slits > > Richard: You should be ashamed > > > That's hardly an argume

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

Bruno: I doubt a photon needs to double his energy to go through two slits Richard: You should be ashamed On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 23 Nov 2014, at 12:32, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > Yes, and as the branches multiply, so does the energy. > &

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

Yes, and as the branches multiply, so does the energy. On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 3:52 AM, LizR wrote: > On 21 November 2014 23:07, Richard Ruquist wrote: > >> >>> It seems, yes. In our branch. But not in the physical reality as a >>> whole, where informatio

Re: Can we test for parallel worlds?

If Feynman could renormalize, why can't MWIers(;<) On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 4:52 AM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > LizR wrote: > >> On 22 November 2014 09:31, Richard Ruquist > yann...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Collapse is necessary if you wish to conserve

Re: Can we test for parallel worlds?

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 2:05 PM, wrote: > > > On Friday, November 21, 2014 12:40:11 PM UTC, yanniru wrote: >> >> >> >> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 7:02 AM, wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Monday, November 17, 2014 11:49:06 AM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 16 Nov 2014, at 20:32, 'Chris de Mors

Re: Edge: Myth of A.I.

You are right. My racewalking buddy and college classmate, a Doctor Professor (retired) on the Yale Medical School faculty, is engaged in Big Data regarding reading tissue data as to whether it is carcinogenic. Right now that is entirely done by visual inspection of doctors using their personal jud

Re: Can we test for parallel worlds?

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 7:02 AM, wrote: > > > On Monday, November 17, 2014 11:49:06 AM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 16 Nov 2014, at 20:32, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List wrote: >> >> Interesting speculative physics… that makes claims that parallel worlds >> may be testable. >> >

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 4:52 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 20 Nov 2014, at 19:10, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > > > On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> On 20 Nov 2014, at 01:03, Russell Standish wrote: >> >> On Wed, Nov

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 4:38 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 20 Nov 2014, at 12:53, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 6:04 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List < > everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > >> Ah! You don't think that the

Re: Quantum Mechanics Violation of the Second Law

"statistical-mechanical ensembles arise naturally from quantum entanglement" http://people.physics.anu.edu.au/~tas110/Teaching/Lectures/L5/Material/Lloyd06.pdf a lecture given by Seth Lloyd QUANTUM THERMODYNAMICS Excuse our ignorance Classically, the second law of thermodynamics implies that our

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 20 Nov 2014, at 01:03, Russell Standish wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 11:06:47AM -0500, Richard Ruquist wrote: >> >>> >>> The collapse hypothesis is correct if we need to conserve the total &

Re: Reversing time = local reversal of thermodynamic arrows?

On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 19 Nov 2014, at 19:43, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > In MWI it is rather difficult to reverse time and unsplit the universe. > > > The "mutiverse" is only the quantum configuration space taken seriously.

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

seems that information is conserved in an MWI Math Space > where every possibility is known ahead of time; > whereas information is created, but energy conserved > in in a wave-collapse physical space. > > > > > -Original Message- > From: Richard Ruquist > T

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

It seems that information is conserved in an MWI Math Space where every possibility is known ahead of time; whereas information is created, but energy conserved in in a wave-collapse physical space. On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 7:59 AM, spudboy100 via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com>

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 6:04 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > Ah! You don't think that the collapse in one universe, creates one, in > which the information is preserved? Not uncovers one, splits of a new > clone, like an amoeba does. Perhaps there ar

Re: Reversing time = local reversal of thermodynamic arrows?

You cannot really believe that coherency controls your life.?? On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:56 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Richard Ruquist > wrote: > > > In MWI it is rather difficult to reverse time and unsplit the universe. >> > > Re

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:25 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 19 Nov 2014, at 18:41, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> On 19 Nov 2014, at 17:06, Richard Ruquist wrote: >> >> >> >&

Re: Reversing time = local reversal of thermodynamic arrows?

In MWI it is rather difficult to reverse time and unsplit the universe. It's not Hermitian Richard On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:40 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 12:06 AM, Russell Standish > wrote: > > >> I'd say that by about 1850 when people started to have a understanding >>> o

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 19 Nov 2014, at 16:44, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 5:12 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> On 19 Nov 2014, at 05:18, meekerdb wrote: >> >> On 11/18/2014 4:57 PM,

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 19 Nov 2014, at 17:06, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 6:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> On 18 Nov 2014, at 18:34, John Clark wrote: >> >> On Mon, Nov

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 6:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 18 Nov 2014, at 18:34, John Clark wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 Bruno Marchal wrote: > > >> Maybe Schrodinger's Wave Equation doesn't interfere either, only other >>> worlds do, >>> >> >> > ? >> > ! > > >> and maybe the wave equation

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 5:12 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 19 Nov 2014, at 05:18, meekerdb wrote: > > On 11/18/2014 4:57 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 19 November 2014 06:45, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 11/18/2014 5:00 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 17 Nov 2014, at 21:13, meekerdb wrote: >> >>

Re: Edge: Myth of A.I.

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Alberto G. Corona > wrote: > >> As Nicolás Gómez Dávila said (more or less): The modern man indulge >> itself thinking that he is a mechanism, but protest loudly when he is >> treated as such. >> > > I w

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 6:31 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 15 Nov 2014, at 17:02, John Clark wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Richard Ruquist > wrote: > > > Along these lines of thought, the universe splitting or differentiation >> in MWI is said to

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

zibbsey, Same here. I hypothesize a collection of intelligent black holes can communicate with each other over classical bridges, but only one bridge at a time per black hole.. Well really it takes two black holes to focus their "entanglement entropy" EEin on each other or on the same interconnec

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

Zipsey, If you care to understand how black communicate with each other, read http://arxiv.org/pdf/1308.0289v1.pdf. clem On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 4:46 PM, wrote: > > > On Saturday, November 15, 2014 9:36:57 PM UTC, zib...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> >> >> On Saturday, November 15, 2014 4:57:14 PM UTC

Re: "Spontaneous creation of the Universe Ex Nihilo"

Russell's 'nothing/everything duality' reminds me of one mechanism in string theory by which a nearly Planck scale point reflects the entire outside universe within itself in a r->1/r transformation, that point being each Calabi_yau compact manifold. Richard On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 5:19 PM, Russel

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

The Hamiltonian for the process of de On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 12:27 PM, John Clark wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Russell Standish > wrote: > > > The Multiverse equivalent of conservation of energy is unitarity of the >> evolution of Schroedinger's equation. Or equivalently, that

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Russell Standish wrote: > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 05:14:24PM -0500, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > > > But QM equations are time reversible, The differentiation of the universe > > is not > > Your point being? > > >

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Russell Standish wrote: > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 01:33:15PM -0500, John Clark wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 Richard Ruquist wrote: > > > > > OK, I will accept that information cannot be communicated faster than > the > > &

Re: Two apparently different forms of entropy

Along these lines of thought, the universe splitting or differentiation in MWI is said to be irreversible even though the equation of QM are time reversible. That might account for the arrow of time. Of course wave collapse is also irreversible and is similar to MWI to that extent. On Fri, Nov 14,

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

In other words you do not know On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:33 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 Richard Ruquist wrote: > > > OK, I will accept that information cannot be communicated faster than >> the speed of light. However, even in single particle EPR experimen

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

the huge number of interactions resulting in what MWI calls new universes, where does all this extra energy come from. Personally I prefer to believe in the conservation of energy than MWI. On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 10:27 AM, John Clark wrote: > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 7:24 PM, Richard Ruqu

Re: "Spontaneous creation of the Universe Ex Nihilo"

Since when are observers quantities? On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:49 PM, Russell Standish wrote: > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:32:05PM -0500, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Russell Standish < > li...@hpcoders.com.au> > > wrote: > > &g

Re: "Spontaneous creation of the Universe Ex Nihilo"

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Russell Standish wrote: > On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 11:38:55PM -0800, Peter Sas wrote: > > I've read it... well I've read parts of it anyway... I downloaded a copy > > from the net, I don't know if that's also the final book version of his > > Theory of Nothing...

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

;s possible the same > is true of BECs. > Yes. Please tell me how GR is correct and QM is wrong, which is the case if info was not transferred instantaneously. > > > On 14 November 2014 13:24, Richard Ruquist wrote: > >> It has been proven that entangled BECs can transfer in

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

13, 2014 at 5:54 PM, LizR wrote: > On 14 November 2014 11:20, Richard Ruquist wrote: > >> I believe that the why is because wavefunctions behave like entangled >> BECs where information can be transferred instantly. >> > > It can? Please explain further. (Are you

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

I believe that the why is because wavefunctions behave like entangled BECs where information can be transferred instantly. Richard On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:59 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:21 PM, Richard Ruquist > wrote: > > > Quantum mechanics does not al

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

Quantum mechanics does not allow for a " big messy smudge". The resulting photon must have the original frequency/energy. IMO MWI allows for a " big messy smudge" only it cannot be 1p seen. Besides a tremendous creation of energy is required to obtain discrete photons of original frequency in ofte

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:08 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 12 Nov 2014, at 09:07, LizR wrote: > > On 12 November 2014 20:32, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> On 11 Nov 2014, at 22:18, Bruce Kellett wrote: >> >> Bruno Marchal wrote: >>> If I tell you that I have thrown a coin, and put a dolla

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:19 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 11 Nov 2014, at 13:13, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > That seems contrary to EPR experiments where the split happens faster than > the speed of light. > > > There is no split. Only local differentiation of the f

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 11 Nov 2014, at 08:40, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 11/10/2014 10:35 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: >>> >>>> meekerdb wrote: >>>> >>>>> On

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

That seems contrary to EPR experiments where the split happens faster than the speed of light. On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 3:27 AM, LizR wrote: > If David Deutsch is correct, splitting is slower than or at lightspeed, > and doesn't cause whole universes to diverge (he also says universes are > only

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

Bruce, I questioned Bruno's statement that MWI universe splitting proceeds at the speed of light on the basis of EPR experiments which seem to suggest that the splitting proceeds faster than the speed of light. Could you comment on this? I was unable to understand Bruno's response. Richard On Mon

Re: Reversing time = local reversal of thermodynamic arrows?

Besides the quark-gluon plasma was a BEC On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > LizR wrote: > >> On 7 November 2014 22:30, Bruce Kellett > > wrote: >> >> No, my main problem with identifying the expansion of the universe >> as the origin

Re: Reversing time = local reversal of thermodynamic arrows?

The Big Bang fireball was a quark-gluon plasma which has been recreated in several high energy colliders. That plasma is characterized as a BEC in which all particles share the same wave function, so they say. I would expect that a BEC is very low entropy. Is that true? On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 6:02

Re: Reversing time = local reversal of thermodynamic arrows?

Zibbsey, you write amazingly like Hibbsa. On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 6:04 PM, wrote: > At the moment goofy theories abound, typically that divide into infinity > structures which derive according to whatever is needed for whatever is the > centre piece theory to pass muster. Typically, screen out th

Re: Seeing without seeing...

Bruno: The differentiation can't go faster than light Richard: How is that consistent with the EPR experiments? On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 04 Nov 2014, at 22:47, meekerdb wrote: > > On 11/4/2014 9:23 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 02 Nov 2014, at 19:09, me

Fwd: Fw: the physics arXiv blog

Random Image Experiment Reveals The Building Blocks of Human Imagination <http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/arXivblog/~3/unyAKuGka7E/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email> -- Forwarded message ------ From: richard ruquist Date: Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 10:32 AM Subject: Fw: t

Re: Do parallel universes really exist, and interact

I think that string theory explains the weirdness of quantum theory. A basic feature of string theory is that a number of dimensions curl up into ultra-fine particles of space called Calabi-Yau Manifolds CYMs. Being an array rigid particles in space, we hypothesize that they form a Bose-Einstein C

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 2:37 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 10/31/2014 7:50 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> On 30 Oct 2014, at 19:52, Richard Ruquist wrote: >> >> I envision wave functions as empty shells that can be filled with energy. >>> >> >>

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 30 Oct 2014, at 13:08, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > What- a delayed post eraser suggesting self-interference is extant(;<) > > > > Glad you see the problem. I knew I couldn't be the only one :) > >

Fwd: Neural Turing Machine

-- Forwarded message -- From: richard ruquist Date: Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 10:32 AM Subject: Neural Turing Machine To: Swines , " achristianvsatheistc...@yahoogroups.com" < achristianvsatheistc...@yahoogroups.com>, Thoretical_physics Yahoogroups < theoretical_phys

everything-list@googlegroups.com

Magnetic forces are neither attractive nor repulsive. On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Peter Sas wrote: > Photons are bosons, mediator particles The bosons mediate the forces > between the fermions, the building pieces of matter... I guess what I wanna > know is this: can all the foces medi

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

What- a delayed post eraser suggesting self-interference is extant(;<) On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 7:12 PM, LizR wrote: > you can delete your posts (I think?) > > On 30 October 2014 12:07, wrote: > >> >> >> On Wednesday, October 29, 2014 11:03:01 PM UTC, zib...@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On W

everything-list@googlegroups.com

Peter Sas needs an education in physics. He came to the right place. On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 6:10 AM, LizR wrote: > I thought the electromagnetic force was mediated by the exchange of > photons (or virtual photons). Does that involve any forces that aren't > attractive/repusive at the point of i

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

Been there. Done that. Dementia comes from sleep deprivation due to ... too many details. On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 4:53 PM, LizR wrote: > On 30 October 2014 09:14, Richard Ruquist wrote: > >> Yes to both questions. String theory treats spacetime as a continuum and >> the lo

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

, LizR wrote: > > On 28 October 2014 10:56, Richard Ruquist wrote: > >> But the span of infinity is outside spacetime. >> > I would say it's an abstract property of certain mathematical systems (or > something similar). If GR is right and spacetime is a continuum,

Re: MGA revisited paper + supervenience

Bruno responds with the Gaussian (somewhat like measure theory) which suggests that some worlds are less important than this one. (Peter wrote that in his blog) and which seems inconsistent with duplication. Richard On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 3:01 AM, LizR wrote: > On 28 October 2014 17:14,

Re: MGA revisited paper + supervenience

My simple-minded view of MWI is that it is deterministic and if it is true then my consciousness is an illusion, period On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 10:10 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 6:38 AM, LizR wrote: > > > So far the only real (non-sarcastic, non-insult-based) objection I've

Re: "The Span of Infinity"

But the span of infinity is outside spacetime. On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 5:44 PM, LizR wrote: > On 28 October 2014 10:18, spudboy100 via Everything List < > everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > >> >> Sent from AOL Mobile Mail >> >> That! My friend is an ex-parrot. I didn't come here for an

Re: Do today's philosophers even think about the existence of God anymore?

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 27 Oct 2014, at 13:05, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > I have not seen any discussion of what Bruno calls the Gaussian nature of > comp or MWI with which he claims that his beliefs in this universe are not > found in the

Re: Do today's philosophers even think about the existence of God anymore?

I have not seen any discussion of what Bruno calls the Gaussian nature of comp or MWI with which he claims that his beliefs in this universe are not found in the negative in other universes of the multiverse. I referred to this as the GWI of reality and suggested that it might be consistent with Zu

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:50 AM, Peter Sas wrote: > Well, I'm not a physicists but a philosopher, so I cannot give a > physicist's answer. My approach is to start with the most fundamental > question (Why is there anything at all?) and then see how far we can get > with pure logic alone. It is of

Re: Are We Really Conscious? (NYT Article today)

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 9:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 19 Oct 2014, at 21:14, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: > > Very well, and now we go to the primal. I am presuming, but who wrote the > programs for computationalism, > > > I guess you mean "who wrote the programs for the computati

Re: Why is there something rather than nothing? From quantum theory to dialectics?

Peter, Could you elaborate on how Dark Energy fits into your thesis? Richard On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:33 AM, Peter Sas wrote: > Hi guys, > > Here is a blog piece I wrote about nothing as the ultimate source of being: > > > http://critique-of-pure-interest.blogspot.nl/2014/09/why-is-there-somet

Re: MGA revisited paper + supervenience

Brent, That is certainly true for Schrodinger's equations, but is it also true for matrix theory? Re: real and complex numbers. Richard On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 1:30 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 10/21/2014 8:05 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 22 October 2014 08:40, Russell Standish wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct

Re: generalizations_of_islam - God Matter

Liz, I am not sure that you can call the underpinning physical. But you certainly have a good point. According to one string theory, what seems to exist before the creation of the universe are dimensions and flux, and symmetries and quantum theory. At the big-bang some of the dimensions inflate

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >