Jaynes has some value, in that his work shows the result of a brilliant mind going totally orthogonal to what we today assume to be correct.
It’s like reading the works of the mediaeval scholars, but we share mor social context with him.
It’s like reading the works of the mediaeval scholars, but we share mor social context with him.
PS. "Algebraic Theology" now that sounds peculiar.-
... why not express DD-aproved concepts in "His" notation? Perfect sense.-
And goddesses (no quotes) if you take Ramanujan seriously :)
Sorry to hijack this convo with “Chalcogenic Rheology”, aka self-healing glasses, aka “Vitreous Punk”*
https://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-have-developed-glass...
https://phys.org/news/2024-07-glass-microscopic-defects-reve...
*Seeing who convo-initiator is, also getting reminded I need to work on that gvicino summary..
Paying lipservice to the original intent though, the notation may be post-1945, but the exercise is completely early modern. What would be a worked example towards a modern Algebraic Theology?
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00407-023-00319-9
Nicely brought up. Nice catch.-
For example, Namagiri might ask Narasimha to disembowel that person, neither colleague nor rival, using a mike that is neither free of feedback nor delivers adequate volume, who is neither asking a question nor making a statement, yet commenting upon something that was neither in the slides nor part of the presentation...
(Though, i note en passant its unfashionable to name your son “Apollo” in the angle world)