Re: science only works with half a brain

On 9/17/2012 8:47 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Stephen P. King http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/substance/ " Descartes believed in only TWO kinds of substance: material body, which is defined by extension, and mental substance, which is defined by thought, which, in this context, is more or le

Re: Re: science only works with half a brain

Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." - Receiving the following content - From: Stephen P. King Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-16, 12:26:18 Subject: Re: science only works with half a brai

Re: Re: science only works with half a brain

t him so that everything could function." - Receiving the following content - From: meekerdb Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-15, 22:46:04 Subject: Re: science only works with half a brain On 9/15/2012 7:36 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 2:50 PM, meekerdb

Re: science only works with half a brain

On 9/16/2012 6:11 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sep 16, 2012, at 5:00 PM, "Stephen P. King" wrote: On 9/16/2012 3:06 PM, Jason Resch wrote: Why does a physical system have to be non-invertible? My understanding is that current physical laws imply that systems are invertible. Hi Jason,

Re: science only works with half a brain

On 9/16/2012 6:11 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sep 16, 2012, at 5:00 PM, "Stephen P. King" wrote: On 9/16/2012 3:06 PM, Jason Resch wrote: Why does a physical system have to be non-invertible? My understanding is that current physical laws imply that systems are invertible. Hi Jason,

Re: science only works with half a brain

On Sep 16, 2012, at 5:00 PM, "Stephen P. King" wrote: On 9/16/2012 3:06 PM, Jason Resch wrote: Why does a physical system have to be non-invertible? My understanding is that current physical laws imply that systems are invertible. Hi Jason, Say hello to the "problem of time".

Re: science only works with half a brain

On 9/16/2012 3:06 PM, Jason Resch wrote: Yes, but note that even in the case of a purely abstract mathematical universe, like a Hilbert space, we use a coordinate system and sets of maps to relate the relations of where "things" are in the space of the universe. Sure, but my p

Re: science only works with half a brain

On Sep 16, 2012, at 5:01 PM, "Stephen P. King" wrote: On 9/16/2012 3:06 PM, Jason Resch wrote: Where is our universe located? What could its location be relative to? That question presupposes that there is a large universe that this one is embedded into and that it is possible

Re: science only works with half a brain

On 9/16/2012 3:06 PM, Jason Resch wrote: Where is our universe located? What could its location be relative to? That question presupposes that there is a large universe that this one is embedded into and that it is possible to define both coordinate maps from

Re: science only works with half a brain

On 9/16/2012 3:06 PM, Jason Resch wrote: Why does a physical system have to be non-invertible? My understanding is that current physical laws imply that systems are invertible. Hi Jason, Say hello to the "problem of time". -- Onward! Stephen http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw

Re: science only works with half a brain

On 9/16/2012 8:52 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Stephen P. King Mereology seems to be something like Spinoza's metaphysics, that there is just one stuff in the universe and that stuff is God. So there is just one material. Hi Roger, Yes. Each of these philosophers focused on different things

Re: Re: science only works with half a brain

's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." - Receiving the following content - From: Stephen P. King Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-15, 13:19:40 Subject: Re: science only works with half a brain Hi Roger, You might thi

Re: science only works with half a brain

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 9:46 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 9/15/2012 7:36 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 2:50 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 9/15/2012 8:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 14 Sep 2012, at 18:36, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:32 A

Re: science only works with half a brain

On 9/15/2012 7:36 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 2:50 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 9/15/2012 8:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 14 Sep 2012, at 18:36, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Stephen P. King mailto:stephe...@

Re: science only works with half a brain

Stephen, I'm not sure if you might have missed this message. You have made other replies in this thread, but not to the below message: Thanks, Jason On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Stephen P. King > wrote: > >> On 9/14/2012 12:36

Re: science only works with half a brain

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 2:50 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 9/15/2012 8:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 14 Sep 2012, at 18:36, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: > >> I contend that universality is the independence of computations to any >> parti

Re: science only works with half a brain

On 9/15/2012 8:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 14 Sep 2012, at 18:36, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Stephen P. King > wrote: I contend that universality is the independence of computations to any particular machine but there must

Re: science only works with half a brain

;d have to invent him so that everything could function." - Receiving the following content - *From:* Stephen P. King <mailto:stephe...@charter.net> *Receiver:* everything-list <mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com> *Time:* 2012-09-14, 12:40:45 *Subject

Re: science only works with half a brain

On 14 Sep 2012, at 18:36, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Stephen P. King > wrote: I contend that universality is the independence of computations to any particular machine but there must be at least one physical system that can implement a given computation for that

Re: Re: science only works with half a brain

he following content - From: Stephen P. King Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-14, 12:40:45 Subject: Re: science only works with half a brain On 9/14/2012 8:14 AM, Roger Clough wrote: > Hi Bruno Marchal > > Objective things are things that can be measured (are extende

Re: science only works with half a brain

On 14 Sep 2012, at 15:32, Stephen P. King wrote: On 9/14/2012 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 13 Sep 2012, at 13:17, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal and meekerdb, ROGER: Hi meekerdb First, science can only work with quantity, not quality, so it only works with half a brain. MEEK

Re: science only works with half a brain

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: > On 9/14/2012 12:36 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: > >> I contend that universality is the independence of computations to any >> particular machine but there must be at least one p

Re: science only works with half a brain

there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-14, 04:09:27 Subject: Re: science only works with half a brain On 13 Sep 2012, at 13:17, Roger Clou

Re: science only works with half a brain

On 9/14/2012 12:36 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Stephen P. King mailto:stephe...@charter.net>> wrote: I contend that universality is the independence of computations to any particular machine but there must be at least one physical system that can impl

Re: science only works with half a brain

9-14, 04:09:27 Subject: Re: science only works with half a brain On 13 Sep 2012, at 13:17, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal and meekerdb, ROGER: Hi meekerdb First, science can only work with quantity, not quality, so it only works with half a brain. MEEKERDB [actually it is BRUNO]: B

Re: science only works with half a brain

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: > I contend that universality is the independence of computations to any > particular machine but there must be at least one physical system that can > implement a given computation for that computation to be knowable. This is > just a acce

Re: science only works with half a brain

On 9/14/2012 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 13 Sep 2012, at 13:17, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal and meekerdb, ROGER: Hi meekerdb First, science can only work with quantity, not quality, so it only works with half a brain. MEEKERDB [actually it is BRUNO]: Bad decision. You are t

Re: Re: science only works with half a brain

uot; - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-14, 04:09:27 Subject: Re: science only works with half a brain On 13 Sep 2012, at 13:17, Roger Clough wrote: > Hi Bruno Marchal and meekerdb, > > > ROGER: Hi meekerdb &

Re: science only works with half a brain

On 13 Sep 2012, at 13:17, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal and meekerdb, ROGER: Hi meekerdb First, science can only work with quantity, not quality, so it only works with half a brain. MEEKERDB [actually it is BRUNO]: Bad decision. You are the one cutting the "corpus callosum" here.

Re: Re: science only works with half a brain

Hi Bruno Marchal and meekerdb, ROGER: Hi meekerdb First, science can only work with quantity, not quality, so it only works with half a brain. MEEKERDB: Bad decision. You are the one cutting the "corpus callosum" here. ROGER: You have to. Quantity is an objective measure, quality is a

Re: science only works with half a brain

On 12 Sep 2012, at 13:24, Roger Clough wrote: Hi meekerdb First, science can only work with quantity, not quality, so it only works with half a brain. Bad decision. You are the one cutting the "corpus callosum" here. Secondly, meaning is not a scientific category. So science can neither