Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

> On May 2, 2019, at 8:21 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > > Eric writes: > > < 4. The values of those microscopic observables can evolve jointly with > values of more complicated large-actor observables that we describe as > apparatus measuring spins etc., and the branches of the large-actor st

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

Eric writes: < 4. The values of those microscopic observables can evolve jointly with values of more complicated large-actor observables that we describe as apparatus measuring spins etc., and the branches of the large-actor state vector can evolve to have no coherence; but that evolution is st

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

Okay, one last, and then I die, having created as much chaos in the world as it was my place to create. > On May 1, 2019, at 8:09 AM, Nick Thompson wrote: > > The Schrodinger's cat can be both dead and un-dead, but I cannot know a thing > and not know it, except by equivocating on the meaning

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

The essay by Hywel, which he called "Neutrinos for my Friends" doesn't discuss the aspects of gravity that we had touched upon such as "how does it act across space?" (I think I read that John Baez had reached a point where he was discouraged about loop quantum gravity) So I won't bother to share

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

Hi Nick, in turn, > On May 1, 2019, at 5:15 AM, Nick Thompson wrote: > > I knew I would get my ears boxed for this: Not boxed; just conversed with. > > I was in a forum with a bunch of physicists last year many of whom were > wedded to the notion that nature was determined by things beyond

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

> On May 1, 2019, at 2:33 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > > I was just throwing out two, the wormhole idea of Maldacena & Susskind and > super-determinism described by Hooft.They seem very different to me, and > could imply two very different universes. That QM works for either doesn't > he

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

On May 1, 2019, at 12:58 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote: Marcus wrote: > < Why do people seek this (as Eric puts it) emotional comfort with their ways > of knowing? > > > Either spacetime works in a surprising way and commonsense intuition is just > wrong -- to cling to a familiar way of knowing a

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

Hi Marcus et al. > On Apr 30, 2019, at 10:41 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > > Eric writes: > > < The important consequence of this understanding is that we have > mathematical formalizations of the concept of state and of observable, and > they are two different kinds of concept. It is precisel

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

Glen writes: < To make that point concrete, I'll talk about the local VFW, which is populated with racist, self-righteous jerks. Renee' and I tend to like aged drinkers ... partly because we are aged drinkers in the making. So there's a natural affinity with the regulars at the local VFW. I can

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

On 5/1/19 2:23 PM, Nick Thompson wrote: > Historically, women have not found us much fun. Induction is the Devil. On 5/1/19 2:22 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > There are "leadership positions" on this mailing list?!Wow, there are two > words that make me leave a party. Ha! Unfortunately, lea

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

G Historically, women have not found us much fun. n Nicholas S. Thompson Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology Clark University http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ -Original Message- From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of glen Sent: Wedne

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

There are "leadership positions" on this mailing list?!Wow, there are two words that make me leave a party. I became aware of some these cable shows staying with my uncle for a few days. There are also the ones about plastic surgery. It's incredible to imagine going under the knife to be a

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

Yep. It is sexist. But lest we get confused, the sexists are men, not women. I'm pummeled on a daily basis for my ... [ahem] "sensitivity". On Twitch recently, some jerk gamer accused me of being a CASUAL just for saying I liked playing co-op games with Renee' ... the Texas analog for being call

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

A brief survey leads me to believe there are no non-satire Real Husbands of X programs on cable. This is completely sexist. There ought to be a way for a middle-aged man to get a stylist, a trainer, a wardrobe, a television program *and* to have their partners (male or female) celebrate the in

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

Agreed! But I've put on about 5 lbs of fat during this last winter season. Add that to my bald head and it's obvious my dreams of being a trophy husband are delusional. The best I could hope for is to rub my beard a lot and speak only rarely in cryptic, pseudo-profound jargon ... maybe wearing t

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

Oh, gosh! "Humiliate?!!!" I hope not. N Nicholas S. Thompson Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology Clark University http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ -Original Message- From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Marcus Daniels Sent: Wedn

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

Glen writes: "Now I suppose I have to read yours as well. I should just quit my job and read full time. Renee' makes enough money to support us, I think." I have a colleague whose husband is a F16 pilot. (Wow!) As he moves up through the ranks, she is the main source of income. She says thi

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

Nick writes: "My basic New Thought (new to me, I mean) was, why talk about biology when we can talk about computer programming, given the wonders that simple algorithms (eg, cellular automata) can generate." It's true it is all much more coherent. But the algorithms are simple and the machin

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

Very nice! Had you prefaced the link to the paper with that, I would have better understand *why* it might be a good idea to read it. I also failed to infer the challenge to ... non-materialist? ... interpretations of phenomena generated by CAs. Your text was too obtuse for me. I can defend at l

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

I left when the pit bull had lost interest in the other dog, which it couldn't reach . The pit bull, kind of playfully, went back to its master who was upright by then, as if nothing had happened. To be honest, I felt sorry for that guy but I didn't want to engage with him because his options

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

What a great story, Marcus. Do you know how it came out? I know that's irrelevant, but still I want to know. More to the point, I take it you have no trouble calling that behavior "single-mindedness." Does anybody else? Nick Nicholas S. Thompson Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biol

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

Glen, I direct my posts at who ever made me think about something. I think I am following up on a question you asked, roughly, why are we talking about consciousness when basic facts of biology pose all the interesting problems and we know a lot more about them? My basic New Thought (new to

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

On 5/1/19, 12:06 PM, "uǝlƃ ☣" wrote: < All that text is merely to provide context that my guess is your depth-firsty commitment to a reasonably trustworthy reductionism isn't as depth-firsty as you think it is. It's more like those massive muscles in your back or leg that attract all the at

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

Very interesting. In the last post, I deleted a paragraph where I analogized the human population to a swarm intelligence optimization problem, each human being an ant pursuing her own little solution, but the whole circumscribing (up to a convex hull) the solution space. I deleted it because I

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

Glen writes: < In fact, culturally, I wonder why so many of you *direct* your posts at all > >From a career of trying to redirect or humiliate students in a classroom >setting? :-) Marcus FRIAM Applied Complexity Group lists

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

Heh, you mistake me for someone who thinks clearly and understands social interaction. I have no idea why you forwarded that or why you direct it at me. In fact, culturally, I wonder why so many of you *direct* your posts at all. So many of you start your posts with "Bob, ..." or "Tim, ...". It'

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

Glen writes: < But, in my ignorant understanding of the process, neither physics nor mathematical paradox resolution rely on that. It's always some munging of old things to arrive at the new things, including munging the logic by which the implications are inferred. Why is "shut up and calculat

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

But that's what's confusing to me. Why do we need the metaphysical extrapolation from the model to "the true explanation"? I'm not saying I don't suffer from a similar need. I'm asking for myself as much as anyone else. By "seem very different", you're asserting classical logic, a fragility to

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

Frank writes: “The question is, how does it accomplish "action-at-a-distance"? There are explanations of other such phenomena. Particles sent back and forth, etc.” Particles travelling at 10,000 times the speed of light? https://arxiv.org/abs/1303.0614 Marcus ===

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

I did find notes from Hywel but they are too long to send to Friam. Perhaps they could be put on a server. I will see if they say enough about gravity to make that worthwhile. Frank --- Frank Wimberly My memoir: https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly My sci

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

We already know what it causes. The question is, how does it accomplish "action-at-a-distance"? There are explanations of other such phenomena. Particles sent back and forth, etc. Ask Hywel for details. Perhaps he left some notes. Or has an equivalent Oracle on the list. Frank --

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

Hi, again, Glen, This Article , published in the 70's, will show that my materialist affiliations go way back. Please let me know if the link doesn’t work. My children, who are now pushing sixty, admit that I have become

Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow

Uncertainty means that every scenario must be considered. Surely you've had to run experiments where there was missing data (like a superposition state) and surely you've had to use p-values? Or are you saying there is a property of quantum systems beyond probability that seems irrelevant to