--- Spudboy100@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 5/14/00 8:15:35 PM Pacific
> Daylight Time,
> bradbury@aeiveos.com writes:
>
> << I will simply observe that I made a concrete
> suggestion
> about what *we* could all as individuals do to
> allow
> the recreation of "beings", in the not too distant
> future, with reasonable probabilities of looking
> like former
> individuals whose mental and biomaterial had been
> preserved.
>
> This seems to have gone from A, to B, to Z, where Z
> represents the "Wouldn't it be nice if we had some
> more
> magic physics so we can have everything we ever
> wanted." >>
> Interesting what one would consider 'magic physics'
> and what one considers
> within the realm of coherent probability? Many
> people, yes even scholars
> educated in physics, astronomy, biology, and
> computer science; would, sadly,
> be very scornful of this entire mailing list and the
> subjects that govern it.
> Perhaps some guidence might be in order for levels
> of acceptability on what
> falls into the realm of reality and what is beyond
> the pale? Are multiple
> universes magic physics or non-locality?
> Mitch
I say we just call them "magical non-localities."
=====
-------
Dan Adams
Boston College
617.782.4050
"I cannot articulate enough to express my dislike to people who think that understanding spoils your experience...How would they know?"
- Marvin Minsky
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:11:14 MDT