Thanks, m.a.
At least Cantor has been lucky to have respectful adversaries like
Kronecker. I am still criticized in my back on work I have never done
by people I have never met. The years 1977 and 2008 have been the
worst, and I ask myself if I should make some move.
Also, there has been three people who told me they have abandoned
their PhD thesis, or change their subject when they have been asked
for not referring to my work, or just my name. My work will be given
its due, perhaps without my name: it is not so important. Or is it?
My work in the seventies were just theoretical computer science, and
were just slightly visionary, but even then, and especially at that
time, the problems were not related to some work of mine: it is really
the contrary. It is because I am ignored, for stupid bad and
contingent facts which I have been unluckily witnessing, that I have
pushed a little bit more the obvious revolutionary aspect of the comp
hyp. It is because I am ignored about simple mathematical facts (that
any patient scientist can verify, and actually have verified), that I
have decided to single out the theologiical aspect, I have tried
diplomacy during 20 years without success, so that the strategy,
changed by itself. Time is running, not for me but for everyone,
locally and nowadays.There is no economical crisis, you know, only a
deep ethical crisis. Soon or later this will be clear, if not already.
It is not a coincidence: I am fighting for the listening of the first
person internal to a theory, against person who practice the
elimination of person, in the scientific inquiry. But they just
confuse a genuine simplifying methodology, with a scientific statement
(generally more neutral) And this is just not working, obviously in
the human sciences.
On another level; It is easy to hate "my work", or to make people
hating such work, because it is above all a remind that "science" has
not yet solved the "mind-body problem". The opportunity of the
computationalist hypothesis comes from the fact that it gives a
mathematical formulation of the problem, or of many subproblems.
I am just asking a question, like, - look with comp I am duplicable
there is something weird, no?. Because this *seemed* to be unclear, I
have made it clearest through paradoxes, and then argument. and
eventually the math and the computer science. It is a question like,
do you see where matter comes from when machines, betting they are
machine, asks themselves?
Don't worry for me, I am dead since a long time. This gives me
infinite power and patience.
In the worst case I could come back next millenium:)
In the very long run I am optimist, if the humans does not take the
opportunity, the spiders will. In any case we will see. With comp, as
far as we are divine; we are hypotheses ourselves. We are divine
hypothesis.
And then, what makes me rather optimistic right now, for the future of
comp, is the discovery of Salvia Divinorum. It looks like she can
teach "my work" in less than four minutes! We can't stop the
progress, isn't? Take this with some degree but I got many
confirmations through reports by others. I will say more later asap,
in response to Johnathan. Not that those people does suddenly discover
that reality is different, but that reality *can* be different.
We are living an incredible and wonderful period, m.a., we are living
the discoveries (and development) of the Universal Machine, the other
Universal Machine, and then that plant. That plant helps, like
remembering your dream can help. Philosophizing on video-game based
movies and novels can help too. Simulacron III and Matrix can help.
The only thing which I have to explain for those who already get
clearly UDA1-6, that is the main difficulty of UDA7-8, is the
understanding of the difference between a computation, and a
description of a computation, it is really the difference between a
number and a relation between the numbers.
Thanks for your kind attention, and best wishes,
Bruno
PS I participate to a little colloquium now, and I will find time to
comment other posts probably only monday. Have a good week-end.
On 20 Mar 2009, at 02:55, m.a. wrote:
>
> Dear Bruno,
> Cantor also had an ignorant, implacable
> nemesis who stalled his career, but he was totally justified in
> time. I hope you live to see your theories given their due.
>
> martin
> a.
>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Bruno Marchal" <marchal.domain.name.hidden>
>>> To: <everything-list.domain.name.hidden>
>>>
>>>
>>> The little scandal has grown up all the time and is too big, now. It
>>> is the kind of manipulation which makes everyone feel responsible,
>>> from corporatist reflex to corporatist reflex, when actually there
>>> is
>>> only one, very clever, but very bad, guy.
>>
>
> >
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Fri Mar 20 2009 - 15:29:33 PDT