Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id MAA14974 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 22 Jan 2001 12:12:25 GMT Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745BEE@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on... Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 12:11:14 -0000 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
This list has suddenly taken a turn for personal invective, but I'm not
going to let that put me off.
Your use of other references has been challenged on many occasions because
of your idiolectic use of them to support your own theory, for which you
provide not a single piece of original, empirical evidence. You
deliberately misunderstand entire disciplines are try and wrench them into
your model.
All you have is specious argument, and a deliberate persistent ability to
completely ignore perfectly straight-forward questions or points that others
make that, at the very least, create problems for your claims, and more
usually reveal your theory's paucity.
You've done it again here, and the fact that you've got nasty only
demonstrates you intellectual inadequacy. I would have thought someone
convinced they'd found the answer to life the universe and everything, would
have a bit more patience and civility, but then one can't expect that much
from a colonial....
Vincent
> ----------
> From: Chris Lofting
> Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2001 10:08 am
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...
>
> they contain references i.e. evidence to support the concepts; you just
> seem
> too slow in reading them.
>
> For brain stuff see http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond/brefs.html Also
> see,
> for esoteric/I Ching and NLP refs,
> http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond/irefs.html for quantum-mind related
> stuff see http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond/wrefs.html
>
> For text with specific refs see for example
> http://www.eisa.net.au/~lofting/general.html
>
> READ vincent. IF I had websites with NO backup refs then ok what you say
> has
> value but I DO have support. perhaps your just too afraid to read them?
> :-)
>
> Either get of your arse and do some reading or else shut up.
>
> Chris.
> ------------------
> Chris Lofting
> websites:
> http://www.eisa.net.au/~lofting
> http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond
> List Owner: http://www.egroups.com/group/semiosis
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
> > Of Vincent Campbell
> > Sent: Friday, 19 January 2001 11:22
> > To: 'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'
> > Subject: RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...
> >
> >
> > How do light bulbs work Chris? (sorry that's light globes, for Aussies)
> >
> > Light gets refracted by things, but it's speed doesn't change. Light
> from
> > stars close to our Sun is refracted by the gravity of our Sun, such that
> > during a solar eclipse those stars move (convincing most doubters that
> > Einstein was on the right lines, by the way). The faint wobble
> > in the light
> > from distant stars caused by planets orbiting them, is how we detect
> > extra-solar planets.
> >
> > Of course experimental design rests on design, which influences the way
> > findings are intepreted. Anyone, studying any discipline should
> > know that.
> > It's not about interpretation, Chris, it's about what really goes on out
> > there in the universe, and our persistent efforts to represent such
> things
> > in ways we can comprehend. What you seem to be saying it's all
> > interpretation, but that you,a nd you alone, have uncovered the inherent
> > structure of that interpretation.
> >
> > But, the key thing is, if you are going to try and identify a
> > meta-structure
> > that underlies and explains all possible forms of interpretation,
> > there's a
> > little thing, I'm not sure if you've heard of it, that's quite
> > important if
> > anyone is going to take you seriously. It's called evidence.
> >
> > Your posts, and your websites, don't contain evidence, they contain
> > obfuscatory argument.
> >
> > Vincent
> >
> > > ----------
> > > From: Chris Lofting
> > > Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> > > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 8:12 am
> > > To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> > > Subject: RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
> > [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
> > > > Of Vincent Campbell
> > > > Sent: Thursday, 18 January 2001 11:54
> > > > To: 'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'
> > > > Subject: RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > <it is obvious from this remark that either you did not read
> the
> > > > post or you
> > > > > are a bit slow on the uptake today! :-)>
> > > > >
> > > > Of course I read all of your interminably long post. You can't
> > > > deny what is
> > > > the case just because it doesn't suit your model. Light displays
> > > > characteristics of both waves and particles, even the Royal
> > Institution
> > > > Christmans lectures explained it in this way a couple of years ago.
> > > >
> > >
> > > So? what has this to do with discussion on methods of interpretation?
> > > There
> > > is no assertion re the 'facts' but how the METHOD of analysis can
> create
> > > misconceptions. When you create an experiment to test for something
> the
> > > design and intent does not come out of nowhere, it comes out of
> > your MODEL
> > > of reality and that model has STRUCTURE and that structure is rooted
> in
> > > your
> > > neurolology and so the test validates the structure and more so
> REFLECTS
> > > that structure.
> > >
> > > I am surprised that you cannot pick this up, you seem to be stuck in
> > > expression mode incapable of differentiating!
> > >
> > > If I create an experiment based on dichotomisations (e.g. left
> > slit, right
> > > slit) and if wave patterns are a property of this METHOD regardless of
> > > what
> > > it is applied-to then there will be a case where I will see
> > this property
> > > expressed and so the property is not necessarily a property of 'out
> > > there'.
> > > IOW the method I used to experiment is the source of meaning and all
> > > patterns I get from applying that method are meaningful only in the
> > > context
> > > of the method and not necessarily generalisable.
> > >
> > > It is the CONTEXT that determines the PERCEPTION but that context is
> > > coloured by the METHOD. If I view things in a classical way then in
> > > general
> > > I will see 'classical' but when anomolies emerge I will drift into
> > > non-classical and out of that create a 'new' paradigm.
> > >
> > > The point is that all POSSIBLE meanings are already coded in
> > the neurology
> > > as potentials based on potiental object/relationships
> > distinctions and so
> > > we
> > > can 'refine' our maps buy studying these areas and then re-viewing our
> > > maps.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > >> By the way, that reminds me that you never answered that
> > > question
> > > > > > >about the invariability of the speed of light.
> > > > >
> > > > <? I dont recall this at all, when, where?>
> > > >
> > > > OK, this was you on the 27/11/2000 (responding to Joe):-
> > > >
> > > > >>>BTW since you have not responded to previous emails (both off
> > > > > > >>memetics and
> > > > > > > >on) I suppose I will have to point you in the 'right'
> > > > direction: the
> > > > > > >> *fourth* concept that enables the encapsulation of the
> > > > idea of a wave
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > >SPEED, something you leave out so as to retain your
> > > > > > >>trichotomy... As usual
> > > > > > >> all those who favour trichotomies fail to differentiate
> > > relational
> > > > > > >> processes, they lump them all together, Freud did, Popper
> did,
> > > > > > >>and Peirce
> > > > > > >> did. An education based on these sorts of works prior to
> > > > analysis of
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > >neurology clouds your thinking...
> > > > >
> > > > Joe asked:
> > > >
> > > > >> How many speeds does light have, exactly?
> > > >
> > > > You said:
> > > >
> > > > >>>depends on context. in water is different to vaccuum is
> > > > different to air.
> > > >
> > > > To my mind this is an inadequate, and inaccurate statement.
> > > >
> > >
> > > No it isnt. Read up on EMF more, Chekov Radiation etc and while
> > your at it
> > > reflect on this that it is not light that has a limit but more
> > that matter
> > > cannot break its boundary -- expressed in De Broglie's work re matter
> > > wave;
> > > the limit is reflected in a prohibition on the frequency of the matter
> > > wave
> > > becoming infinite. In this universe this is expressed as a speed
> limit.
> > >
> > > Thus light in 'this' universe can vary in a 'multiverse'
> > context -- not my
> > > preferred model but it is a possible.
> > >
> > > Chris.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ===============================================================
> > > This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
> > > Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
> > > For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
> > > see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
> > >
> >
> > ===============================================================
> > This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
> > Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
> > For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
> > see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
> >
>
>
> ===============================================================
> This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
> Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
> For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
> see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
>
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 22 2001 - 12:14:08 GMT