From: John K Clark (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Feb 10 2009 - 00:49:19 MST
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 "Krekoski Ross"
>I made the assumption in the experiment itself, that it only referred to
> non-baryonic teleportation. Though I suppose that this is orthogonal
> to the central issue, which, as I take it, is I think the contention
> that no two real-universe systems are isomorphic down to an arbitrary
> level of specificity, with the caveat that two given abstractions can
> be isomorphic, but their real-universe representations in an underlying
> substrate will not be. I think you're claiming that such isomorphism is
> possible in the real universe, I am claiming that it isn't. I think we
> both operate under a realist framework here, so lets discuss this
> specifically. Discussion about souls and what not is quite adjunct/peripheral!
Orthogonal, isomorphic, adjunct, underlying substrate; you’re going to
need more than a thesaurus if you plan to beat me on this issue, And I
can recognize bafflegab when I see it.
John K Clark
-- John K Clark email@example.com -- http://www.fastmail.fm - I mean, what is it about a decent email service?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 22 2013 - 04:01:37 MDT