1. Walter Fritz thinks that we can get a computer to produce these so
called "non physical" effects (thought and meaning) and that it can all
be reduced to physical, chemical and biological objects and processes.
> 2. Don Mikulecky suggests we use Rosen's catagory theory that deals with
> objects and their models as relational.
>
> 3. John Kineman proposes that existence and experience are one and that
> the becoming experience may be quantum related.
>
> 4. Norm McPhail submits that the qualities of non physical data somehow
> transpose into effecting physical differences.
>
> 5. Alexei Sharov considers it possible that physical existance is a
> condition or expression of meaning.
6. Sascha Ignjatovic postulates a meta mathematical system of the
absolute wich represents the concept of the sum and origin of all
energy/world. To understand this system, we have to start theoretical
research into the concept and structure of the highest possible system,
the absolute.
> 7. Mario Vaneechoutte writes that the key to grasping the non physical
> may be to understand the nature of experience, but he feels that our
> brains may not be capable of doing this.
8. Michael Rogers claims that there may not be a provable distinction
between the physical and non physical, hence, even though it may be of
critical importance, it may not be possible to bridge between our inside
non physical realms of awareness and mind and the outside physical
universe.
Does anyone else want to add a WAG or edit their WAG summary?
If not, those who are so inclined can go ahead and take a stab at
combining these WAGs into a short all inclusive statement. What we're
trying to do is come up with a set of approaches we can use to help us
learn more about what's going on in the hypothetical physical/non
physical zone.
Norm McPhail