<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Fabric-of-Reality at Yahoo! Groups</title>
    <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/</link>
    <description>The Fabric of Reality List: The work of David Deutsch</description>

    <item>
      <title>The Importance of Clarity</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:48:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Alan Forrester</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15173</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15173</guid>
      <description>Hallo peeps, When discussing intellectual matters many people don&#39;t express themselves clearly and don&#39;t stake out a clear position. I think this is a bad</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Does String Theory natively generate wave/particle duality?</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:43:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Elliot Temple</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15172</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15172</guid>
      <description>... Is there some reason MWI does not qualify? -- Elliot Temple http://curi.us/</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Disagreeing With Popper</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:43:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Peter D Jones</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15171</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15171</guid>
      <description>... It&#39;s the unjstified assumption of Platonism/AR.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Disagreeing With Popper</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:43:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Elliot Temple</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15170</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15170</guid>
      <description>... By explanation and critical argument. BTW Popper isn&#39;t looking for *statistical* corroborations. His approach uses creativity not statistics. ... We&#39;re</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Disagreeing With Popper</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:43:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Bruno Marchal</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15169</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15169</guid>
      <description>... What does that mean? I have tried hard to never publicly defend any ideas concerning any subject. I am just a poor humble applied logician, working thus</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Disagreeing With Popper</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:40:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Bruno Marchal</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15168</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15168</guid>
      <description>... But if a &quot;verification&quot; does not support, even partially, a theory, how can we distinguish between an incorrect statistical corroboration, and a correct</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>ah...ok I guess it&#39;s another wave-only idea</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:40:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>hibbsa</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15167</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15167</guid>
      <description>Or I guess String Theory, like MWI, is a wave-only category of theory. Sorry about that.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Does String Theory natively generate wave/particle duality?</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:39:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>hibbsa</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15166</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15166</guid>
      <description>What I mean, does the wave/particle duality effect emerge naturally from the math describing string dynamics - vibrations and so on? If not, then are there any</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Deutsch on Verification</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:39:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>hibbsa</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15165</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15165</guid>
      <description>... As a &#39;bottom-line&#39; what Deutch says seems correct, but only so long as account is taken of how the evolving nature of scientific methodology may alter the</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Reflections after reading Deutsch</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:37:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>David Schneider-Joseph</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15164</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15164</guid>
      <description>... I think you are misunderstanding the meaning of &quot;selection&quot; in this list of criteria.  What you describe sounds like exhaustive search coupled with</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Disagreeing With Popper</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:36:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Elliot Temple</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15163</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15163</guid>
      <description>... To clarify, I don&#39;t think the word &#39;verification&#39; implies gaining certainty. But I object to  &quot;weak&quot; (non-certain) verification just as much as &quot;strong&quot;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Reflections after reading Deutsch</title>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:35:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Elliot Temple</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15162</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15162</guid>
      <description>... Isn&#39;t creation with inheritability the same thing as replication? Both mean a new thing is created with most but not all of the traits of the old thing. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Reflections after reading Deutsch</title>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:33:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>russell standish</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15161</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15161</guid>
      <description>... I think it is entirely valid to apply the moniker evolution to any system that satisfies Lewontin&#39;s 3 principles of variation, selection and</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Disagreeing With Popper</title>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:32:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Bill Taylor</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15160</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15160</guid>
      <description>Elliot says (privately): -&gt; By saying Bruno is right about verification, This is an argument about word meanings (i.e. common/standard usages). It is well</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Disagreeing With Popper</title>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:31:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Elliot Temple</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15159</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fabric-of-Reality/message/15159</guid>
      <description>... Here it is proposed to redefine &quot;verification&quot; to something which is possible to get (specifically a combination of A) best explanation B) corroboration).</description>
    </item>

  </channel>
</rss>
<!-- wr2.grp.sp2.yahoo.com uncompressed/chunked Sun Jul 12 08:50:23 PDT 2009 -->
