Re: Cognitive Theoretic Model of the Universe

From: ronaldheld <>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 07:45:22 -0700 (PDT)

   Since I program in Fortran, I am uncertain how to interpret things.
On May 31, 1:02 pm, Bruno Marchal <> wrote:
> On 30 May 2009, at 23:08, wrote:
> > Has anyone on this list ever heard of this?  A theory of reality
> > formulated by Christopher Michael Langan?
> >
> > It sounds a little sketchy at first, though not entirely different
> > than some of what Bruno Marchal says.
> > Obviously the main reason to pay much attention to it is that Langan
> > has an IQ of between 190 and 210.  Which kept me going past the first
> > paragraph, which is when I would otherwise have stopped.
> > But, after further reading it sounds somewhat more plausible.  I'd be
> > very interested in hearing Bruno's opinion.
> It is a physicalism in disguise. There is also a confusion between a  
> mathematical object as a tool to represent other object, and the other  
> object.
> And using set theory in that setting is a curious choice, given that  
> set theory is known to flatten the concepts. It is the reason what  
> mathematician prefer category theory, or specific theories ... I mean  
> sets? Which sets? It is very unclear how the different notions are  
> related. I can appreciate its apparent open mind on religion, but I  
> don't see any effort to solve problems, nor any clarification of  
> problems. Langan seems not to be afraid of being appreciated by those  
> who want to be mystified instead of understanding.
> But then if you have a link on a real precise theory or results, you  
> can let us know, but my opinion is that it is not really honest, or if  
> it is, then it is presented in a very awkward. To give set a  
> fundamental status is really like saying you should do everything in  
> FORTRAN. Unless you have a good original reason to use sets, but then  
> you should give it.
> Rereading some parts I am not sure at all he even try to say  
> something, ... pervert the usual meaning of the terms. He makes  
> complex simple ideas and hides somehow its naive view of Plato, making  
> me a bit nervous even on points where I could imagine some sense  
> there ...
> ...
> Hmm.... Pompous and Boring, if you ask my opinion.
> Bruno
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at
Received on Tue Jun 02 2009 - 07:45:22 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:16 PST