dsaum

Members
  • Content Count

    28
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About dsaum

  • Birthday November 15

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Altair IV
  • Interests
    gazing into the abyss, fighting monsters from the id

Previous Fields

  • Full Name
    Dr Morbius
  • Favorite Music, Artworks, Movies, Shows, etc.
    movie: Forbidden Planet
  • Looking or Not Looking
    not looking
  1. BTW: I have the full set, and would like to pass them on to another reader. You pay shipping. A fun read! USPS book rate? --Brant Sure. I am guessing something like 30lb, but I will weigh them together in a box. Message me if you want to do the deal.
  2. BTW: I have the full set, and would like to pass them on to another reader. You pay shipping. A fun read!
  3. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/objecting-to-the-season-of-giving/2014/12/19/f2ecb6a4-7fdc-11e4-9f38-95a187e4c1f7_story.html
  4. dsaum

    Atlas Summit 2014

    Harriman comments on state of objectivist movement: http://www.atlassociety.org/as/objectivist-movement-today
  5. The last time I heard this poem was when my buddy and I read it aloud while standing on the "marge of Lake LeBarge" during a 2002 Yukon canoe trip from Whitehorse to Dawson City to prospect for gold! The 30 miles of Lake LeBarge is more dangerous than the 400 miles of Yukon river because it can get choppy quickly and swamp your canoe in its icy waters.
  6. Israel's real purpose in Gaza operation? To kill Arabs Since the first Lebanon war over 30 years ago, Israel's main strategy has been killing Arabs. The current atrocious war in Gaza is no different. http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.604653
  7. Harriman's starting point is that philosophy is prior to physics and so physics depends on it. Physicist who think they are rejecting philosophy as worthless are setting themselves up for accepting some unexamined philosophy. Harriman says that if you read the history of physics, you can generally see exactly why philosophy they assume, and that has a big impact on how they interpret or develop their theories. His lectures spend a lot of time with "horror file" quotes from various physicists. I think Harriman has a point, but he does not seem to have studied Bacon, the first philosopher of science who established the baseline philosophy for science. That baseline allowed scientists to ignore a lot of bad philosophy, so they are not as helpless as Harriman seems to believe. In general I give Harriman an A for asking some interesting questions, and an F for his polemical answers.
  8. I looked at Dan Edge's blog and find some problems. For instance, he begins by saying that Harriman rejects quantum theory. That is incorrect. Harriman says many times in his lectures that quantum theory equations are correct and that fact is well established by experiments, but many of the interpretations of those equations, e.g. Copenhagen Interpretation, are incorrect. Edge's broken link proving his thesis seems to be a quote from a blurb for one of Harriman's lectures, and this blub is probably not even a direct Harriman quote. All of this leads me to believe that Edge probably never listened to any of Harriman's lectures. I think the root problem with Harriman's physics is that it is polemical and not objective.
  9. Philosopher Richard Robinson has several pages of interesting discussion about this topic in his book "Definition" starting at page 140: http://www.amazon.com/Definition-Richard-Robinson/dp/0198241607 You may be able to read this for free at http://www.questia.com/library/1503699/definition "There are are certain traditional "rules of definition", four or five or six in number, originally collected from scattered remarks in Aristotle's Topics, and repeated with minor variations in textbook after textbook or logic, down at least to the nineteen-thirties."
  10. That is close to two weeks. Why so long? The delay may be due to a game that Amazon is playing with folks who self-publish but do not use the Amazon self-publishing arm Createspace.
  11. It seems to be out of stock on Amazon today? http://www.amazon.com/How-We-Know-Harry-Binswanger/dp/0985640618 Wonder why there are no reviews on Amazon? Wonder why there is no kindle version? Wonder why it is not available for sale on Harry's email list site? http://www.hblist.com/ I guess his marketing strategy is to make it hard to get. PS: It seems to be available directly from Harry for $39.99 with FS. http://www.how-we-know.com/ http://www.tofpublications.com/ But his web pages are rather hard to find with search engines due to lack of SEO.
  12. Obviously God's punishment of Denver for dumping Tim Tebow!
  13. A mathematician who worked with the physicist Richard Feynman proposed two primary categories of geniuses: "There are two kinds of geniuses: the ‘ordinary’ and the ‘magicians.’ an ordinary genius is a fellow whom you and I would be just as good as, if we were only many times better. there is no mystery as to how his mind works. Once we understand what they’ve done, we feel certain that we, too, could have done it. it is different with the magicians... Feynman is a magician of the highest caliber."Mark Kac about Richard Feynman, cited in: Scott D. Tremaine (2011) "John Norris Bahcall. 1934–2005. A Biographical Memoir" The Indian mathematician Ramanujan seems to have been in the magician category.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srinivasa_Ramanujan Was Rand just an ordinary genius or a magician? It seems to me that any of her creations considered individually might put her in the "ordinary" class, but her wide-ranging body of work and her artistic creation put her in the magician category. We shall not see her like again.
  14. Snopes on Fukushima http://www.snopes.com/photos/technology/fukushima.asp
  15. http://www.johnmccaskey.com/joomla/index.php/blog/64-attacking-rand