"An approximate self-replicating system with fewer than 100 atoms"
-
Can you link me to the previous ones and why they are not convincing?
I'm in a slightly odd spot here. I feel a little as though I've commented that astrology isn't all that convincing, and someone now wants a list of what I've read about astrology (a fair number of tidbits, over my life, but it was all bad, so I don't remember any titles);
-
-
and they pointers to explanations of why it's not convincing (well, it's so obviously not that I'd never bother looking up such explanations). I don't mean to make an equivalence: the "explanations" of sleep I've read were mostly somewhat better than those of astrology.
-
But they weren't serious. Of course, I may be quite wrong about the current book. But all I can say is: the reviews mostly didn't make me want to spend the time reading it. I mentally bucketed it under:
-
"may be useful for learning about _how_ & _why_ to sleep better, won't help much in explaining why sleep happens."
-
This is a somewhat uncomfortable thread to be writing. It's began with a throwaway joke from my point of view. I don't regard my own point of view above as especially serious or well-founded. It's just how I arrived at my priors, and may be wrong.
- 10 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Well, that's what I asked you what a solution looks like to you, what evidence for its truth looks like; or rather you could point me to explanation X and why you think it is not true.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.