Dear Pedro,
I and I am sure most of us are grateful when you "open up" the debate in this
way. To go farther, though, people must be ready to ask many questions about
familiar concepts such as the following:
1. Are there serious alternatives to Aristotelian causality?
2. Is it possible to combi
Thanks Gordana for this clarification.
When we look at the computing universe and try to understand how physical laws
compute we indeed have to focus on computational modeling more than on
computing. And looking at computational modeling may even bring us beyond
algorithmic
computation in the s
Dear folks,
Overall, I agree with Gordana. I have one, perhaps very large, correction
though. I will go through this bit by bit (no pun intended). I have been
planning to jump into this discussion, but a visit here (UFBA) by
Stewart Newman has kept me busy. He gave lots of examples of
non-comput
Quoting John Collier :
"As I have tried to argue above, to avoid reductionism in reality as
opposed to in logic and mathematics I think we need the additional
condition of dissipation (what I call nonHamiltonian mechanics
elsewhere -- the usual condition of conservation breaks down due to
Step Two of *Learn to Count in Twelve Easy Steps*
*What happened previously:*
Step 1.:
We have introduced additional describing aspects of the logical sentence
a+b=c. Next to a,b,c, we also make use of u=b-a, k=b-2a, t=2b-3a, q=a-2b,
s=17-(a+b|c), w=2a-3b. For a graphical presentation, see:
http
*From:* John Collier
*Sent:* 21 October 2012 11:22 PM
*To:* fis
*Subject:* Re: [Fis] The Information Flow
At 06:14 PM 2012/10/21, Stanley N Salthe wrote:
Pedro -- it is of interest to me that
On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 3:38 PM, PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ
wrote:
Dear FISers,
