Jed,
you ignore with easiness the reproducibility problem
Cna you tell me the rtae of success NOW say at
SKINR, ENEA, Coolescence and others?
Re the ERv report it has 60 pages, you have seen 352 daily reports
not 8448 hourly ones and not the results for 506880 minutes (approx)
When the liti
“I don't think machines will be able to duplicate what a bird brain can do, any
time, ever. Machines which we can invent are things that we can understand
almost completely. However consciousness, even animal consciousness, is
something we will never understand sufficiently to create it, becau
Peter Gluck wrote:
> you ignore with easiness the reproducibility problem
>
I did not ignore it. I stated clearly that this is predicated on
controlling the reaction. I said "Assumption. With Pd-D 200 W/g can be
achieved, at any desired temperature up to the melting point of Pd." If
that cannot
wrote:
“I don't think machines will be able to duplicate what a bird brain can do,
> any time, ever. Machines which we can invent are things that we can
> understand almost completely.
>
I do not think there is rigorous proof of this. On the contrary, decades
ago, computers began doing things t
Aha, the thread about a time-table for the AI "singularity" moves on to
morphic resonance - my favorite counter-argument to the "bird brain"
stance... which posits that the current state of AI is far from
human-like. It is closer than many of us think with only a few improvements.
Morphic reso
Excellent, from now on, if I see ads for investing in PD D I will know they
are not by you.
As regarding NiH we willl see. I suppose you have called main author
Nakamura from NISSAN and asked him what he thinks about NiH.
Your last variant re Rossi's fake data was this; Exactly zero excess heat,
On 17/03/2017 9:43 PM, bobcook39...@gmail.com wrote:
>> "consciousness, . . . is a supernatural phenomenon."
> RIGHT-ON. Like virtual quarks and spooky action at a distance, and
> other real phenomena.
I am surprised that you agreed so readily that telepathy between
consciousnesses is a real phe
On 17/03/2017 10:04 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
mailto:bobcook39...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I don't think machines will be able to duplicate what a bird brain can do, any
time, ever. Machines which we can invent are things that we can understand
almost completely.
I do not think there is rigorous proof
Long before the singularity of 2029, we should be seeing "proto-AI"
machines of surprising capability, costing less than a ladies handbag
(Hermes). By 2020 the market for this kind of alter ego could be huge,
at least for the males who can avoid springing for the handbag. This
kind of early ver
John Shop wrote:
All the advances that have been made are ones which can be imagined and
> achieved with sufficiently advanced technology. However AFAIK all of our
> great minds have so far failed to come to grips with consciousness and some
> (eg Penrose) have demonstrated that human minds at l
Peter Gluck wrote:
> Your last variant re Rossi's fake data was this; Exactly zero excess heat,
> watermeter lying 4 Times more flow 103 C fluid water not trace of steam.
>
At 4 atm 103°C water is liquid without a trace of steam. 4 atm is not much.
The back pressure from the radiator was more
On 18/03/2017 2:23 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
The fact is that almost every educated and intelligent person would regard
telepathy as supernatural . . .
First, I regard it as mythical, not supernatural. There is no solid evidence
for it. Second, I am sure that if does exist, it is natural, because
Jed Rothwell wrote: AFAIK all of our great minds have so far failed to
come to grips with consciousness
The difficulty had been exaggerated. I don't think it is more than the
ability of the brain to put together a 3D image of the local world and
where you are in it. Plus things like sound,
Who 'delivers' the 4 atm?
You really seem to be in trance.
OK, tell it is fake but do not give pseudo-technical explanations.
peter
PS I have finished this uselesss discussion, I stil prefer logic.
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Peter Gluck wrote:
>
>
>> Your last varia
Peter Gluck wrote:
Who 'delivers' the 4 atm?
>
Back pressure from the radiator. When you force a fluid through a radiator
(or heat exchanger) this raises the pressure of the fluid. It does not take
much pressure to raise the boiling point of water above 103°C. See:
https://durathermfluids.com/p
Basta, signore! The manometer says- no obstacle, steam is condensed.
peter
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 9:51 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Peter Gluck wrote:
>
> Who 'delivers' the 4 atm?
>>
>
> Back pressure from the radiator. When you force a fluid through a radiator
> (or heat exchanger) this raises
John Shop wrote:
>
> There is no solid evidence for it. Second, I am sure that if does exist,
> it is natural, because so many other things people used to think are
> supernatural or inexplicable turned out to be explicable.
>
> I am amazed that you have the gall to trot out the usual "there is no
Hello
The vapourpressure of water at 100 Celcius is 76 cmHg.
At 103 Celcius the vapour pressure is 84.51 cm Hg = 1,112 atm
Peter v Noorden
From: Peter Gluck
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 8:59 PM
To: VORTEX
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Palladium cold fusion as an energy source
Basta, signore! The manometer
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2017/03/mar-17-2017-lenr-about-populism-and.html
peter
--
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
In reply to 's message of Fri, 17 Mar 2017 21:24:29
+0100:
Hi,
[snip]
>Hello
>The vapourpressure of water at 100 Celcius is 76 cmHg.
>At 103 Celcius the vapour pressure is 84.51 cm Hg = 1,112 atm
Note that in the Netherlands a "," is used as the decimal point.
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
http
Jones Beene wrote:
> An ability to learn from an interactive network is the key - even if one
> never gets out of cyberspace. Because the bird-brain-PC is essentially
> tireless, working 24/7 it will be able to surpass the ability of the human
> model for many tasks when given the chance...
>
The
Here is an interesting look at the question: What is real intelligence and
what is merely a mechanistic imitation of intelligence? To address this, I
say let's look at colony of bees.
Bees are amazing creatures. They build nests with complex structures. They
harvest food from the surroundings. The
Robin
That is correct
Peter
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
From: mix...@bigpond.com
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 9:31 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Palladium cold fusion as an energy source
In reply to 's message of Fri, 17 Mar 2017 21:24:29
+0100:
Hi,
[snip]
Hello
The
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
The colony as a whole exhibits far more intelligence than one individual
> bee does. ... The nature of bee colony intelligence is totally alien to
> human intelligence.
>
Perhaps. But there is at least one way that human intelligence might be
An application of AI that I think will be possible in the near-term future,
if there are not already people working on it: lie detection. There is a
school of behavioral psychology that believes that people's behavior
changes in subtle ways that betrays them when they knowingly tell a lie,
even if
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 9:09 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
In the 1950s many books and cartoons portrayed robots of the future as
> being similar to people, walking on two legs with faces and hands.
>
The robots from Boston Dynamics are certainly a bit scarier than humanoid
robots. Here is one of the
26 matches
Mail list logo
