tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post1185236907294848428..comments2023-07-23T14:10:14.460+02:00Comments on Shall we talk?: Two slits on my headFloconhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02152293520895506516noreply@blogger.comBlogger143125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-88090256411554705532012-11-10T22:26:10.029+01:002012-11-10T22:26:10.029+01:00Oh, and as to your other questions, yes, of course...Oh, and as to your other questions, yes, of course, you are correct.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-42628501158453556132012-11-10T22:16:03.342+01:002012-11-10T22:16:03.342+01:00Yes, you heard correctly. He mentions the Ātman. E...Yes, you heard correctly. He mentions the <i>Ātman</i>. Even though you're listening to a foreign tongue and what with your presbycusis, hyperacusis, and tinnitus, you picked up on this. You're impressively erudite Flocon.<br /><br /><i>isn't Watt saying exactly what I was writing some times ago?</i><br /><br />Yes, yes. I was fairly sure that you would appreciate his philosophical Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-60840529393577022172012-11-09T19:48:53.103+01:002012-11-09T19:48:53.103+01:00There are many fascinating speeches of Alan Watts ...There are many fascinating speeches of Alan Watts closely related to this topic on YouTube, which is not suprising considering he was a philosopher and a Buddhist as well.<br /><br />There's this one called <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cl3DHp5S9gw&list=LPTOfr201O65k&index=3&feature=plcp" rel="nofollow">The Myopic View Of The World</a> and at 1:37, isn't Watt saying Floconhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02152293520895506516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-21877057823318566172012-11-09T19:04:13.897+01:002012-11-09T19:04:13.897+01:00My hearing is not good Anijo (presbycusis, hyperac...My hearing is not good Anijo (presbycusis, hyperacusis, tinnitus) and a source of anxiety knowing that it is definitive and that I shall never again hear silence: I endure a whistling kettle in my head 24 hours a day.<br /><br />That's why I usually never listen to links where people speak, es ist mir sehr unangenehm und schwierig. Even when it's in French it is very uncomfortable, and Floconhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02152293520895506516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-76117165013732510262012-11-09T02:00:07.463+01:002012-11-09T02:00:07.463+01:00Salut Flocon,
I'm still curious about what yo...Salut Flocon,<br /><br />I'm still curious about what you think about Alan Watts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-65487015982024197732012-11-08T01:18:07.106+01:002012-11-08T01:18:07.106+01:00Flocon, you might find this interesting.Flocon, you might find <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqmkRrFYO1w" rel="nofollow">this</a> interesting.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-38830343959288075682012-10-02T00:52:21.950+02:002012-10-02T00:52:21.950+02:00I hoped that my anecdotal experience on Kant's...<i>I hoped that my anecdotal experience on Kant's proposition would draw your attention, no luck.</i><br /><br />Je me suis demandé un instant de quoi tu parlais until I remembered the illicit subtances.<br /><br />It had me smiling of course but what was I supposed to say in the end? Des fois je n'ai pas de répartie worth mentioning...<br /><br />Anijo has her beverage, it is liquid, youFloconhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02152293520895506516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-57933347476180760642012-10-01T19:09:13.876+02:002012-10-01T19:09:13.876+02:00I hoped that my anecdotal experience on Kant's...I hoped that my anecdotal experience on Kant's proposition would draw your attention, no luck.<br /><br />As to <a href="http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/science/know_l2/black_holes.html" rel="nofollow">Black Holes</a> we know a bit about them. There is more at the NASA site.<br /><br />Your references are too long for me to read at the moment.Ned Luddhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00599196155953996432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-91400772211792216662012-10-01T12:17:27.872+02:002012-10-01T12:17:27.872+02:00Don't waste your time with Kant's judgemen...Don't waste your time with Kant's judgements anyway, they're not fundamental. You may as well completely forget about his 12 categories, or rather 9 of them.<br /><br />But what is essential, fundamental and revolutionary is his finding of our <i>a priori</i> forms of sensibility, Time, Space and Causality.<br /><br />This cannot be underestimatedFloconhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02152293520895506516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-24760182406290552282012-10-01T11:20:40.962+02:002012-10-01T11:20:40.962+02:00-4° Interpreters have debated whether the latter c...-4° <i>Interpreters have debated whether the latter claim makes sense: it seems to imply that we know at least one thing about the thing in itself (i.e., that it is unknowable)</i>.<br /><br />C'est jouer sur les mots là.<br /><br />This is another fallacy (interpreters wouls do anything to draw attention on them).<br /><br />Dismantling of the fallacy:<br />We know nothing about black holes Floconhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02152293520895506516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-65438749687423960682012-10-01T10:34:43.096+02:002012-10-01T10:34:43.096+02:00You must be commanded for your interest and dedica...You must be commanded for your interest and dedication to the topic Ned...<br /><br />As a foreword to my answer, it must be kept in mind that contrary to maths, physics, chemistry et all. where 51 : 3 (more complicated examples are valid) will absolutely always give 17 whether in Chinese, German or Portuguese, the apparently same notion or concept in philosophy will be dealt and treated in very Floconhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02152293520895506516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-80615836612033289272012-10-01T09:06:04.461+02:002012-10-01T09:06:04.461+02:00Another thing I don't understand. The articles...Another thing I don't understand. The articles mentioned talk about "synthetic a priori propositions" and Nietzsche about "synthetic judgements". But neither article explains what is meant by "synthetic" and I am lost.Ned Luddhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00599196155953996432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-26093477486260947752012-10-01T08:36:59.619+02:002012-10-01T08:36:59.619+02:00I knew about the difference between noumenon and p...I knew about the difference between noumenon and phenomenon, but I learned more from your link. One thing at the link is that Schopenhauer argued that Kant changed the meaning of the words. I don't know enough about it to argue the point myself.<br /><br />According to what I read, I think I can agree with Kant that the thing-in-self may be unknowable, but I didn't see where he said it Ned Luddhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00599196155953996432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-12568728274164151282012-09-30T17:55:47.330+02:002012-09-30T17:55:47.330+02:00Ned,
I agree with all that you say, just I am be...Ned, <br /><br />I agree with all that you say, just I am being a little cautious here though.<br /><br /><i>there could have been other universes possible.</i><br /><br />On peut l'imaginer en effet but at the end of the day it is the one we know that exists with us.<br /><br />The conditional tense opens the door to innumerable billions of possibilities. At each and every nano second Floconhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02152293520895506516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-52821534217819517042012-09-30T09:11:36.316+02:002012-09-30T09:11:36.316+02:00As I noted earlier, there could have been other un...As I noted earlier, there could have been other universes possible. Ours has the particularity that the original conditions and physics made the elements that made stars and galaxies and eventually the earth come into existence. These conditions had to fall in a narrow range to make all that possible.<br /><br />Whether there are multiverses with different or the same physics is not my point hereNed Luddhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00599196155953996432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-22243742742229664842012-09-29T12:13:30.199+02:002012-09-29T12:13:30.199+02:00Ned,
Ok, right you're are, my bad, there are ...Ned,<br /><br />Ok, right you're are, my bad, there are indeed <b>three</b> tracks.<br /><br />-1° The usual one that absolutely every train goes along and the one you and Semperfidelis are on.<br /><br />-2° The one that absolutely no train takes because it definitively leads to a dead end and everybody knows that and it is beyond any questioning because it is as sure as 2 + 2 = 4. It's Floconhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02152293520895506516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-85543802084351356202012-09-29T11:30:04.766+02:002012-09-29T11:30:04.766+02:00Sorry Flocon, but your last sentence puzzles me. I...Sorry Flocon, but your last sentence puzzles me. I think I understand, but I am sure you could put it in a better way. It's confusing to say we think you have taken the wrong track, which implies that for you that it is the right one since we oppose it. Then you add that you took a different track. So the two tracks seem to be the same one.<br /><br />Also, the metaphor is not so good. If we Ned Luddhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00599196155953996432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-30972502950284081772012-09-29T10:01:10.037+02:002012-09-29T10:01:10.037+02:00SemperFidelis,
Your last comment went direct into...SemperFidelis,<br /><br />Your last comment went direct into the spambox and has just be freed. Sorry about that, I have no explanation, maybe did you post from another computer than the one you usually post from?<br /><br />---------<br /><br /><i> BUT THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT DOES NOT EXIST.</i><br /><br />Thank you, thank you very much for unwillingly proving my point.<br /><br />We've Floconhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02152293520895506516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-31108541573043652882012-09-29T07:52:08.366+02:002012-09-29T07:52:08.366+02:00Anijo, on re-reading, I think I made a mistake in ...Anijo, on re-reading, I think I made a mistake in relating "complex" to complex numbers. This was caused by my relating his "real formulation" to real numbers. Maybe that is what was meant but now I think not.Ned Luddhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00599196155953996432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-16216988786710727862012-09-29T06:12:25.631+02:002012-09-29T06:12:25.631+02:00Anijo, I should also add that I have given several...Anijo, I should also add that I have given several links to scientists who try to give answers for the layman.Ned Luddhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00599196155953996432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-17717520018021252192012-09-29T04:47:03.200+02:002012-09-29T04:47:03.200+02:00Anijo, you ask me a difficult question, because wi...Anijo, you ask me a difficult question, because with probability I probably realized that I had reached my limit in following modern math. To give you an example, here is someone trying to explain <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability_amplitude" rel="nofollow">Probability Amplitude</a> <br /><br />"The principal use of probability amplitudes is as the physical meaning of the Ned Luddhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00599196155953996432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-9876295288632842512012-09-29T01:24:26.666+02:002012-09-29T01:24:26.666+02:00Anijo: //That is, there is no specific place that...Anijo: //That is, there is no specific place that the electron is at until the observer observes it.//<br /><br />Exactly. We can observe the electron and at the moment of observation (in the language of our discussion above, at the moment we perceive it as a particle)we can determine its location with (in theory, but in actuality limited by the sensitivities of our instruments)100% probabilityAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-56195270485466010142012-09-29T00:54:48.978+02:002012-09-29T00:54:48.978+02:00And yes, I do know what Matterwave was getting at,...And yes, I do know what Matterwave was getting at, in that he was attempting to describe a complex notion in layman's terms, yes.<br /><br />Anyway, the point is that there is no 'specific' place that the electron is at until the wave function is collapsed. That is, there is no specific place that the electron is at until the observer observes it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-87491850174666676552012-09-29T00:48:58.869+02:002012-09-29T00:48:58.869+02:00And, Ned, you do understand that the double-split ...And, Ned, you do understand that the double-split experiments for electrons are the same for photons, right?<br /><br />Not sure about this comment that you made:<br /><br /><i>probabilities of finding the particles at specific places.</i><br /><br />Well, one doesn't 'find' particles at 'specific places'.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-186849324750028115.post-21325275112001817542012-09-29T00:39:00.180+02:002012-09-29T00:39:00.180+02:00Ned,
Could you elucidate and explain in more deta...Ned,<br /><br />Could you elucidate and explain in more detail why it is that you agree with Matterave? Merci.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com