Re: Ada Lovelace: others & forerunners
"Bruno Marchal [email protected] [Fabric-of-Reality]" <[email protected]> Thu, 28 Jan 2016 16:26:48 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.science.physics.fabric-of-reality |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
--Apple-Mail-124--1053761357 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi Hibbsa, I put some order on my desktop, and I found a mail from you tha= t I forgot to answer! On 26 Oct 2015, at 18:00, hibbsa-/[email protected] [Fabri= c-of-Reality] wrote: > >---In [email protected], <marchal@= ...> wrote : > > >On 14 Oct 2015, at 16:21, hibbsa@... mailto:hibbsa@... > = >[Fabric-of-Reality] wrote: > > >>---In [email protected] >= >>mailto:[email protected], <marchal@...> wrote : > > >> O= n 09 Oct 2015, at 23:55, hibbsa@... mailto:hibbsa@ > mailto:hibbsa@... > = >>[Fabric-of-Reality] wrote: > > >> >---In Fabric-of-Reality-hHKSG33Tihh9OS/[email protected]= m > >>>mailto:[email protected] mailto: > >>>Fabric-of-Real= [email protected] mailto:[email protected] > , > >>><mar= chal@...> wrote : > > >>>>On 24 Sep 2015, at 13:33, hibbsa@... > >>>>mailto= :hibbsa@ mailto:hibbsa@ mailto:hibbsa@ mailto:hibbsa@... > >>>>[Fabric-of-R= eality] wrote: > > >>>regarding Ada Lovelace contributions to computing, > = >>>David Deutsch tweets https://twitter.com/ > >>>https://twitter.com/ http= s://twitter.com/ https://twitter.com/ > >>>DavidDeutschOxf/status/644977353= 651785730: > > > >>>"ProfBrianCox @FryRsquared Fascinating. It convinced > = >>>me that I was wrong: Babbage never really got universality. > >>>Lovelac= e totally did." > > > >>>Hmm... I have a little french book from 1911 by > = >>>Jacques Lafitte which gave me indirect evidence > >>> that Babbage did g= ot the "universality" insight > >>> (for >computations). he got it not from= his machine(s), > >>> but from the language he invented to describe the > = >>> machine, and he realized that such a language is > >>>as powerfull than= his machine. > >>> I have evidence that Ada invented programming > >>>and = subroutine, but I am not sure she get the > >>> universality I will take a = look (when I have more time). > > >> Yes well....having seen the documentar= y I spent a > >>little time digging out some details (actually all I did > = >>was visit (the site/blog of) some trusted historians of science). > >>App= arently all Ada Lovelace did was publish a single > >>paper, in which she p= erformed a translation to English > >>of a lecture given by or for Babbage.= She added 'poetic > >>annotations' on what one might do with the analytica= l > >>engine. Which was entirely Babbage's' work. Another > >>point was tha= t not only was it absolute bullshit that > >>Lovelace inspired or influence= d at all the first computer, > >>but that it's not straight forwarder that = the analytical > >>machine did. > > >>Hi Hibbsa. What you describe is the u= sual opinion. > >>But the book by Laffite expalins that when creating a > >= >lnague to describe the plan of he machine, Babbage > >>eventually realized= that the language for the plan > >>was as much a discovery than its machin= e, and that > >>he felt frustrated not being able to communicate that > >>d= iscovery. It means that he undertood that his language > >>was a universal = machine too, in (a posteriroi) the > >>mathematical sense which he did not = intent to make > >>precise. Now, I have not seen that language, but I am > = >>open to the idea that Babbage got the "tilt" of the "Turing > >>universal= ity". About ADA, my reading is that she invented > >>the notion of subrouti= ne, and the practice of programming, > >>which demands also some intuiotion= of that universality. > >>With Babbage feeling about its language, the dis= covery is > >> made more explicit. > >> Today we know that some diophantine= polynomial relation > >>are Turing universal. Universality grows >up at th= e very > >>elementary part of the arithmetical reality. > > >Hi Bruno, hope= you're well, > >Sure, on the face of it there's some compelling elements >= >there. It's also significant - from my perspective - that > >Deutsch says= he found it convincing. Because I know how > >much thinking he does about = universality. > >Just to clarify, because it isn't clear whether that last = > >post from me was expressing my own view or the view of some > >historian= s. Actually I was just paraphrasing the views I read. > >But...I do think h= istorians have a lot to input into this sort > >of thing. > >The big questi= on is really whether there is actual causality > >in the flow of certain hi= storical events. No one would likely > >doubt that Lovelace anticipated asp= ects of computing. But the > >question of whether she changed the line of h= istory is more involved. > >The difference is just that any number of peopl= e can be said > >in hindsight to have anticipated. That number is really di= rectly > >proportional to the detail of history that one is aware. Whereas = > >to be in the line of causality is much more constrained. So a much > >hi= gher accolade. > > >Hi Hibbsa, > > > >What is interesting is that G=C3=B6de= l missed Church's thesis, > >and disbelieve it until reading Turing's paper= . > >Church itself did not really grasp it as much as people > >like Emil P= ost, or Stephen Kleene, or the philosopher > >Judson Webb, who wrote a book= showing how the classical > >machine already defeat Lucas-Pensore type of = argument. > > Your earlier very interesting reply to David Deutsch touched = on > this matter. It's a period and subject into which I am lately > more c= urious. For example, I know that Einstein spent a lot of > his time while v= isiting, walking about with Godel. Naively I > do wonder what they were tal= king about, and given it was over > that period Einstein was struggling wit= h 'spooky action at a > distance', whether he was playing around with 'inco= mpleteness' > and 'uncertainty' with a view to a possible relation. > Accor= ding to Palle Yourgrau, even G=C3=B6del was nervous about the idea that "= incompleteness" was related to uncertainty. As I said, G=C3=B6del (and Eins= tein) missed the Mechanist hypothesis implication, especially with respec= t to the "mind-body" problem. But the first person indeterminacy do intro= duce a relation between them, indeed, it reduces the whole physics into a= probability calculus on the computations (already emulated by the arithm= etical reality). They key to see this formally is that G=C3=B6del's prova= bility predicate []p does not entail the consistency of p (~[]~p, that is= <>p), so we can define a new modality by []p & <>t, and this one does ac= t like a probability, even a sort of quantum probability. It looks like b= oth Einstein and G=C3=B6del censored themselves on some questions. In the= same book (Palle Yourgrau: "a world without time, the forgotten legacy o= f Einstein and G=C3=B6del, Allen Lane book/Penguin 2005") I learned that = eventually Einstein recognize that we copuld study mathematics with motiv= ation on fundamental matter (before, G=C3=B6del was a "conventionalist" i= n mathematics; he took mathematics as a language only). > And if > he= was, does that mean he was actually looking for an abstract > "meta" expla= nation. No one else was doing that...no one else went > there at that time,= I don't think. Whatta guy :O) > > I'd like to be able to say something dir= ectly relevant to your > point, but I'm out of my depth for now, I'm afraid= . > No problem. It is a complex subject, and today, we still remain in the= Aristotelian theological paradigm. Most people still believe (or worse= : take for granted) a primary physical universe, which is the second God = of Aristotle, and I have shown it to be incompatible with Mechanism (and = Occam). The main argument is simple. I translated into arithmetic, which = is still simple for the logicians, but seems difficult for non-logicians)= . > > > >Deustch seems to believe in a notion of physical universality= , > >in a stronger sense: the existence of a physical machine able > >to em= ulate all physical systems in polynomial time. To me, > >this is an open pr= oblem. One type of universal system would > >won in the statistics of all c= omputations, and would have > >that property. It is quite plausible, but it= is still an > >open problem to me, or in arithmetic (such problems can > >= be translated in arithmetic, or in arithmetical terms > >(involving possibl= e quite complex set of numbers, like > >arithmetical truth). The fact that = the observable of the > >Turing machine, as I define them, have a natural q= uantization > >in arithmetic is just a promise toward such quantum machine.= > >Empirically, the evidences are quite strong, no doubt. > > I actually d= on't think physical sciences would have come down > from the trees in the f= irst place had there been a dogmatic > attachment to things as they first a= ppear to be, or not one > that was conscious and deliberate. > I say someti= mes that Aristotelian physics is born with the apparition of life, and wa= s put in doubt by Plato, and then came back with Aristotle and did not le= ave us until now. It is normal, evolution is short term based, and to sur= vive it is important to not doubt about the preys and the predators. Plat= onism needs a bit of luxury and leisure. > > The unconscious 'bias' ty= pe flavour is legitimate and should > more attention and/or a better standa= rd of attention IMHO. But > attributing that sort of thing to individuals i= s not something > that I would personally want to do. It's also a little > = self-defeating because doing so presumably entails giving oneself > a clean= bill of health on those same terms, to be fit to examine > others without = fear of personal bias. > Plato's main understanding is that the fundamental= reality was counter- intuitive. Aristotle, but also the intuitionist late= r, or those physicists who believe in a primary Time, resist that idea an= d try to save Aristotle's view, but in the long run, I think we will unde= rstand that Plato is correct. In fact G=C3=B6del show that machines alrea= dy get that point, except that he did not see the formal theory as machin= e- subject, but as human theories. he was a semantical platonist, but not = so much realist about the theories/machines, despite he was the first t= o study them (meta)-mathematically. Best, Bruno > > >Best, > > > >Br= uno > > http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ --Apple-Mail-124--1053761357 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/htm= l4/strict.dtd"> <html> <head> </head> =20 <body style=3D"background-color: #fff;"> <span style=3D"display:none"> </span> <!--~-|**|PrettyHtmlStartT|**|-~--> <div id=3D"ygrp-mlmsg" style=3D"position:relative;"> <div id=3D"ygrp-msg" style=3D"z-index: 1;"> <!--~-|**|PrettyHtmlEndT|**|-~--> <div id=3D"ygrp-text" > =20=20=20=20=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20=20 <p>Hi Hibbsa,<div><br></div><div>I put some order on my desktop, and = I found a mail from you that I forgot to answer!</div><div><br></div><div><= br><div><div>On 26 Oct 2015, at 18:00, <a href=3D"mailto:hibbsa-/[email protected]">= hibbsa-/[email protected]</a> [Fabric-of-Reality] wrote:</div><br class=3D"Apple-int= erchange-newline"><blockquote type=3D"cite"> <div style=3D"background-c= olor: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> <span> </span> <div id=3D"ygrp-text">= <p>>---In <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]">Fabric-of= [email protected]</a>, <marchal@...> wrote :<br> <br> >On 1= 4 Oct 2015, at 16:21, hibbsa@... <a href=3D"mailto:hibbsa@">mailto:hibbsa@<= /a>... <br> >[Fabric-of-Reality] wrote:<br> <br> >>---In <a href= =3D"mailto:[email protected]">fabric-of-reality@yahoogroups= .com</a> <br> >><a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]">= mailto:[email protected]</a>, <marchal@...> wrote :<b= r> <br> >> On 09 Oct 2015, at 23:55, hibbsa@... <a href=3D"mailto:hib= bsa@">mailto:hibbsa@</a> <a href=3D"mailto:hibbsa@">mailto:hibbsa@</a>...<b= r> >>[Fabric-of-Reality] wrote:<br> <br> >> >---In <a href= =3D"mailto:[email protected]">Fabric-of-Reality@yahoogroups= .com</a> <br> >>><a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]= om">mailto:[email protected]</a> mailto:<br> >>>Fa= [email protected] <a href=3D"mailto:Fabric-of-Reality@yahoogr= oups.com">mailto:[email protected]</a>, <br> >>>&l= t;marchal@...> wrote :<br> <br> >>>>On 24 Sep 2015, at 13:33= , hibbsa@... <br> >>>><a href=3D"mailto:hibbsa@">mailto:hibbsa@= </a> <a href=3D"mailto:hibbsa@">mailto:hibbsa@</a> <a href=3D"mailto:hibbsa= @">mailto:hibbsa@</a> <a href=3D"mailto:hibbsa@">mailto:hibbsa@</a>... <br>= >>>>[Fabric-of-Reality] wrote:<br> <br> >>>regarding = Ada Lovelace contributions to computing, <br> >>>David Deutsch twe= ets <a href=3D"https://twitter.com/">https://twitter.com/</a> <br> >>= ><a href=3D"https://twitter.com/">https://twitter.com/</a> <a href=3D"ht= tps://twitter.com/">https://twitter.com/</a> <a href=3D"https://twitter.com= /">https://twitter.com/</a><br> >>>DavidDeutschOxf/status/64497735= 3651785730:<br> <br> <br> >>>"ProfBrianCox @FryRsquared Fascinatin= g. It convinced <br> >>>me that I was wrong: Babbage never really = got universality. <br> >>>Lovelace totally did."<br> <br> <br> >= ;>>Hmm... I have a little french book from 1911 by <br> >>>J= acques Lafitte which gave me indirect evidence<br> >>> that Babbag= e did got the "universality" insight<br> >>> (for >computations= ). he got it not from his machine(s),<br> >>> but from the languag= e he invented to describe the<br> >>> machine, and he realized tha= t such a language is <br> >>>as powerfull than his machine.<br> &g= t;>> I have evidence that Ada invented programming <br> >>>a= nd subroutine, but I am not sure she get the<br> >>> universality = I will take a look (when I have more time).<br> <br> >> Yes well....h= aving seen the documentary I spent a<br> >>little time digging out so= me details (actually all I did <br> >>was visit (the site/blog of) so= me trusted historians of science). <br> >>Apparently all Ada Lovelace= did was publish a single<br> >>paper, in which she performed a trans= lation to English <br> >>of a lecture given by or for Babbage. She ad= ded 'poetic <br> >>annotations' on what one might do with the analyti= cal <br> >>engine. Which was entirely Babbage's' work. Another<br> &g= t;>point was that not only was it absolute bullshit that <br> >>Lo= velace inspired or influenced at all the first computer, <br> >>but t= hat it's not straight forwarder that the analytical <br> >>machine di= d. <br> <br> >>Hi Hibbsa. What you describe is the usual opinion. <br= > >>But the book by Laffite expalins that when creating a <br> >&g= t;lnague to describe the plan of he machine, Babbage <br> >>eventuall= y realized that the language for the plan <br> >>was as much a discov= ery than its machine, and that <br> >>he felt frustrated not being ab= le to communicate that <br> >>discovery. It means that he undertood t= hat his language <br> >>was a universal machine too, in (a posteriroi= ) the <br> >>mathematical sense which he did not intent to make <br> = >>precise. Now, I have not seen that language, but I am<br> >>o= pen to the idea that Babbage got the "tilt" of the "Turing <br> >>uni= versality". About ADA, my reading is that she invented<br> >>the noti= on of subroutine, and the practice of programming, <br> >>which deman= ds also some intuiotion of that universality. <br> >>With Babbage fee= ling about its language, the discovery is<br> >> made more explicit. = <br> >> Today we know that some diophantine polynomial relation <br> = >>are Turing universal. Universality grows >up at the very <br> &g= t;>elementary part of the arithmetical reality. <br> <br> >Hi Bruno, = hope you're well, <br> >Sure, on the face of it there's some compelling = elements <br> >there. It's also significant - from my perspective - that= <br> >Deutsch says he found it convincing. Because I know how <br> >= much thinking he does about universality. <br> >Just to clarify, because= it isn't clear whether that last <br> >post from me was expressing my o= wn view or the view of some <br> >historians. Actually I was just paraph= rasing the views I read. <br> >But...I do think historians have a lot to= input into this sort <br> >of thing. <br> >The big question is reall= y whether there is actual causality <br> >in the flow of certain histori= cal events. No one would likely <br> >doubt that Lovelace anticipated as= pects of computing. But the <br> >question of whether she changed the li= ne of history is more involved. <br> >The difference is just that any nu= mber of people can be said <br> >in hindsight to have anticipated. That = number is really directly <br> >proportional to the detail of history th= at one is aware. Whereas <br> >to be in the line of causality is much mo= re constrained. So a much <br> >higher accolade. <br> <br> >Hi Hibbsa= ,<br> <br> <br> >What is interesting is that G=C3=B6del missed Church's = thesis, <br> >and disbelieve it until reading Turing's paper. <br> >C= hurch itself did not really grasp it as much as people <br> >like Emil P= ost, or Stephen Kleene, or the philosopher <br> >Judson Webb, who wrote = a book showing how the classical <br> >machine already defeat Lucas-Pens= ore type of argument.<br> <br> Your earlier very interesting reply to David= Deutsch touched on <br> this matter. It's a period and subject into which = I am lately <br> more curious. For example, I know that Einstein spent a lo= t of<br> his time while visiting, walking about with Godel. Naively I <br> = do wonder what they were talking about, and given it was over <br> that per= iod Einstein was struggling with 'spooky action at a <br> distance', whethe= r he was playing around with 'incompleteness' <br> and 'uncertainty' with a= view to a possible relation. </p></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div= >According to Palle Yourgrau, even G=C3=B6del was nervous about the idea th= at "incompleteness" was related to uncertainty. </div><div>As I said, = G=C3=B6del (and Einstein) missed the Mechanist hypothesis implication, espe= cially with respect to the "mind-body" problem. But the first person indete= rminacy do introduce a relation between them, indeed, it reduces the whole = physics into a probability calculus on the computations (already emulated b= y the arithmetical reality). They key to see this formally is that G=C3=B6d= el's provability predicate []p does not entail the consistency of p (~[]~p,= that is <>p), so we can define a new modality by []p & <>t= , and this one does act like a probability, even a sort of quantum probabil= ity.</div><div>It looks like both Einstein and G=C3=B6del censored themselv= es on some questions.</div><div>In the same book (Palle Yourgrau: "a world = without time, the forgotten legacy of Einstein and G=C3=B6del, Allen Lane b= ook/Penguin 2005") I learned that eventually Einstein recognize that we cop= uld study mathematics with motivation on fundamental matter (before, G=C3= =B6del was a "conventionalist" in mathematics; he took mathematics as a lan= guage only).</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><br><blockqu= ote type=3D"cite"><div style=3D"background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div= id=3D"ygrp-mlmsg"><div id=3D"ygrp-msg"><div id=3D"ygrp-text"><p>And if <br= > he was, does that mean he was actually looking for an abstract <br> "meta= " explanation. No one else was doing that...no one else went<br> there at t= hat time, I don't think. Whatta guy :O)<br> <br> I'd like to be able to say= something directly relevant to your <br> point, but I'm out of my depth fo= r now, I'm afraid.<br></p></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></d= iv><div>No problem. It is a complex subject, and today, we still remain in = the Aristotelian theological paradigm. Most people still believe (or worse:= take for granted) a primary physical universe, which is the second God of = Aristotle, and I have shown it to be incompatible with Mechanism (and Occam= ). The main argument is simple. I translated into arithmetic, which is stil= l simple for the logicians, but seems difficult for non-logicians).</div><d= iv><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><br><blockquote t= ype=3D"cite"><div style=3D"background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div id= =3D"ygrp-mlmsg"><div id=3D"ygrp-msg"><div id=3D"ygrp-text"><p> <br> <br> &g= t;Deustch seems to believe in a notion of physical universality, <br> >i= n a stronger sense: the existence of a physical machine able <br> >to em= ulate all physical systems in polynomial time. To me, <br> >this is an o= pen problem. One type of universal system would <br> >won in the statist= ics of all computations, and would have <br> >that property. It is quite= plausible, but it is still an <br> >open problem to me, or in arithmeti= c (such problems can <br> >be translated in arithmetic, or in arithmetic= al terms <br> >(involving possible quite complex set of numbers, like <b= r> >arithmetical truth). The fact that the observable of the <br> >Tu= ring machine, as I define them, have a natural quantization <br> >in ari= thmetic is just a promise toward such quantum machine. <br> >Empirically= , the evidences are quite strong, no doubt.<br> <br> I actually don't think= physical sciences would have come down <br> from the trees in the first pl= ace had there been a dogmatic <br> attachment to things as they first appea= r to be, or not one <br> that was conscious and deliberate. <br></p></div><= /div></div></div></blockquote><div>I say sometimes that Aristotelian physic= s is born with the apparition of life, and was put in doubt by Plato, and t= hen came back with Aristotle and did not leave us until now. It is normal, = evolution is short term based, and to survive it is important to not doubt = about the preys and the predators. Platonism needs a bit of luxury and leis= ure. </div><div><br></div><div><br></div><br><blockquote type=3D"cite"= ><div style=3D"background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div id=3D"ygrp-mlmsg= "><div id=3D"ygrp-msg"><div id=3D"ygrp-text"><p> <br> The unconscious 'bias= ' type flavour is legitimate and should<br> more attention and/or a better = standard of attention IMHO. But <br> attributing that sort of thing to indi= viduals is not something <br> that I would personally want to do. It's also= a little <br> self-defeating because doing so presumably entails giving on= eself <br> a clean bill of health on those same terms, to be fit to examine= <br> others without fear of personal bias. <br></p></div></div></div></div= ></blockquote><div>Plato's main understanding is that the fundamental reali= ty was counter-intuitive. Aristotle, but also the intuitionist later, or th= ose physicists who believe in a primary Time, resist that idea and try to s= ave Aristotle's view, but in the long run, I think we will understand that = Plato is correct. In fact G=C3=B6del show that machines already get that po= int, except that he did not see the formal theory as machine-subject, but a= s human theories. he was a semantical platonist, but not so much realist ab= out the theories/machines, despite he was the first to study them (meta)-ma= thematically.</div><div><br></div><div>Best,</div><div><br></div><div>Bruno= </div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><br><bloc= kquote type=3D"cite"><div style=3D"background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><= div id=3D"ygrp-mlmsg"><div id=3D"ygrp-msg"><div id=3D"ygrp-text"><p> <br> &= gt;Best,<br> <br> <br> >Bruno<br> <br> </p> </div> </div> = <!-- end group email --> </div></div></blockquote><br><div apple=3D"true">= <span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse: separate;color:= rgb(0, 0, 0);font-family: Helvetica;font-size: 12px;font-style: normal;fon= t-variant: normal;font-weight: normal;letter-spacing: normal;text-align: au= to;text-indent: 0px;"><div><div><a href=3D"http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal= /">http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/</a></div><div><br class=3D"webkit-bloc= k-placeholder"></div></div></span><br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"> = </div><br></p> </div> =20=20=20=20=20 <!--~-|**|PrettyHtmlStart|**|-~--> <div style=3D"color: #fff; height: 0;">__._,_.___</div> =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 =20=20 =20 =20=20=20=20 <div style=3D"clear:both"> </div> <div id=3D"fromDMARC" style=3D"margin-top: 10px;"> <hr style=3D"height:2px ; border-width:0; color:#E3E3E3; background= -color:#E3E3E3;"> Posted by: Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> <hr style= =3D"height:2px ; border-width:0; color:#E3E3E3; background-color:#E3E3E3;"> </div> <div style=3D"clear:both"> </div> <table cellspacing=3D4px style=3D"margin-top: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px= ; color: #2D50FD;"> <tbody> <tr> <td style=3D"font-size: 12px; font-family: arial; font-weight: bo= ld; padding: 7px 5px 5px;" > <a style=3D"text-decoration: none; color: #2D50FD= " href=3D"https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Fabric-of-Reality/conversatio= ns/messages/25709;_ylc=3DX3oDMTJxbTczdmFjBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE4ODg2MD= AEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDIwNTg1BG1zZ0lkAzI1NzA5BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3JwbHkEc3RpbWUDM= TQ1NDAxMTc3OQ--?act=3Dreply&messageNum=3D25709">Reply via web post</a> </td> <td>•</td> <td style=3D"font-size: 12px; font-family: arial; padding: 7px 5p= x 5px;" > <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]?subject=3DRe%3A%20Ada%20Lov= elace%3A%20others%20%26%20forerunners" style=3D"text-decoration: none; colo= r: #2D50FD;"> Reply to sender </a> </td> <td>•</td> <td style=3D"font-size: 12px; font-family: arial; padding: 7px 5p= x 5px;"> <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]?subject=3DR= e%3A%20Ada%20Lovelace%3A%20others%20%26%20forerunners" style=3D"text-decora= tion: none; color: #2D50FD"> Reply to group </a> </td> <td>•</td> <td style=3D"font-size: 12px; font-family: arial; padding: 7px 5p= x 5px;" > <a href=3D"https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Fabric-of-Realit= y/conversations/newtopic;_ylc=3DX3oDMTJlMWFidXB1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE= 4ODg2MDAEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDIwNTg1BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA250cGMEc3RpbWUDMTQ1NDAxMT= c3OQ--" style=3D"text-decoration: none; color: #2D50FD">Start a New Topic</= a> </td> <td>•</td> <td style=3D"font-size: 12px; font-family: arial; padding: 7px 5p= x 5px;color: #2D50FD;" > <a href=3D"https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/= Fabric-of-Reality/conversations/topics/25699;_ylc=3DX3oDMTM2YzVodm1jBF9TAzk= 3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE4ODg2MDAEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDIwNTg1BG1zZ0lkAzI1NzA5BHNlYw= NmdHIEc2xrA3Z0cGMEc3RpbWUDMTQ1NDAxMTc3OQR0cGNJZAMyNTY5OQ--" style=3D"text-d= ecoration: none; color: #2D50FD;">Messages in this topic</a> (11) </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 <!------- Start Nav Bar ------> =20 <!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| --> <div id=3D"ygrp-vital" style=3D"background-color: #f2f2f2; font-family: Ver= dana; font-size: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px; padding: 10px;"> <span id=3D"vithd" style=3D"font-weight: bold; color: #333; text-transf= orm: uppercase; "><a href=3D"https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Fabric-of-= Reality/info;_ylc=3DX3oDMTJlZXJtMGw1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE4ODg2MDAEZ3J= wc3BJZAMxNzA1MDIwNTg1BHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZnaHAEc3RpbWUDMTQ1NDAxMTc3OQ--" styl= e=3D"text-decoration: none;">Visit Your Group</a></span> <ul style=3D"list-style-type: none; margin: 0; padding: 0; display: in= line;"> </ul> </div> <div id=3D"ft" style=3D"font-family: Arial; font-size: 11px; margin-top: 5p= x; padding: 0 2px 0 0; clear: both;"> <a href=3D"https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=3DX3oDMTJkNGJzdXNjBF9TAzk3ND= c2NTkwBGdycElkAzE4ODg2MDAEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDIwNTg1BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzd= GltZQMxNDU0MDExNzgw" style=3D"float: left;"><img src=3D"http://l.yimg.com/r= u/static/images/yg/img/email/new_logo/logo-groups-137x15.png" height=3D"15"= width=3D"137" alt=3D"Yahoo! Groups" style=3D"border: 0;"/></a> <div style=3D"color: #747575; float: right;"> • <a href=3D"https://i= nfo.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html" style=3D"text-decoratio= n: none;">Privacy</a> • <a href=3D"mailto:Fabric-of-Reality-unsubscrib= [email protected]?subject=3DUnsubscribe" style=3D"text-decoration: none;">U= nsubscribe</a> • <a href=3D"https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos= /terms/" style=3D"text-decoration: none;">Terms of Use</a> </div> </div> <br> <!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| --> </div> <!-- ygrp-msg --> =20 <!-- Sponsor --> <!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| --> <div id=3D"ygrp-sponsor" style=3D"width:160px; float:right; clear:none; m= argin:0 0 25px 0; background: #fff;"> <!-- Start Recommendations --> <div id=3D"ygrp-reco"> </div> <!-- End Recommendations --> </div> <!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| --> <div style=3D"clear:both; color: #FFF; font-size:1px;">.</div> </div> <img src=3D"http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=3D97359714/grpId=3D1888600/grpspI= d=3D1705020585/msgId=3D25709/stime=3D1454011779" width=3D"1" height=3D"1"> = <br> <img src=3D"http://y.analytics.yahoo.com/fpc.pl?ywarid=3D515FB27823A7407E&a= =3D10001310322279&js=3Dno&resp=3Dimg" width=3D"1" height=3D"1">=20 <div style=3D"color: #fff; height: 0;">__,_._,___</div> <!--~-|**|PrettyHtmlEnd|**|-~--> </body> <!--~-|**|PrettyHtmlStart|**|-~--> <head> <style type=3D"text/css"> <!-- #ygrp-mkp { border: 1px solid #d8d8d8; font-family: Arial; margin: 10px 0; padding: 0 10px; } #ygrp-mkp hr { border: 1px solid #d8d8d8; } #ygrp-mkp #hd { color: #628c2a; font-size: 85%; font-weight: 700; line-height: 122%; margin: 10px 0; } #ygrp-mkp #ads { margin-bottom: 10px; } #ygrp-mkp .ad { padding: 0 0; } #ygrp-mkp .ad p { margin: 0; } #ygrp-mkp .ad a { color: #0000ff; text-decoration: none; } #ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc { font-family: Arial; } #ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc #hd { margin: 10px 0px; font-weight: 700; font-size: 78%; line-height: 122%; } #ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc .ad { margin-bottom: 10px; padding: 0 0; } #actions { font-family: Verdana; font-size: 11px; padding: 10px 0; } #activity { background-color: #e0ecee; float: left; font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10px; padding: 10px; } #activity span { font-weight: 700; } #activity span:first-child { text-transform: uppercase; } #activity span a { color: #5085b6; text-decoration: none; } #activity span span { color: #ff7900; } #activity span .underline { text-decoration: underline; } .attach { clear: both; display: table; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px; padding: 10px 0; width: 400px; } .attach div a { text-decoration: none; } .attach img { border: none; padding-right: 5px; } .attach label { display: block; margin-bottom: 5px; } .attach label a { text-decoration: none; } =20=20 blockquote { margin: 0 0 0 4px; } .bold { font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px; font-weight: 700; } .bold a { text-decoration: none; } dd.last p a { font-family: Verdana; font-weight: 700; } dd.last p span { margin-right: 10px; font-family: Verdana; font-weight: 700; } dd.last p span.yshortcuts { margin-right: 0; } div.attach-table div div a { text-decoration: none; } div.attach-table { width: 400px; } div.file-title a, div.file-title a:active, div.file-title a:hover, div.fi= le-title a:visited { text-decoration: none; } div.photo-title a, div.photo-title a:active, div.photo-title a:hover, div= .photo-title a:visited { text-decoration: none; } div#ygrp-mlmsg #ygrp-msg p a span.yshortcuts { font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10px; font-weight: normal; } .green { color: #628c2a; } .MsoNormal { margin: 0 0 0 0; } o { font-size: 0; } #photos div { float: left; width: 72px; } #photos div div { border: 1px solid #666666; height: 62px; overflow: hidden; width: 62px; } #photos div label { color: #666666; font-size: 10px; overflow: hidden; text-align: center; white-space: nowrap; width: 64px; } #reco-category { font-size: 77%; } #reco-desc { font-size: 77%; } .replbq { margin: 4px; } #ygrp-actbar div a:first-child { /* border-right: 0px solid #000;*/ margin-right: 2px; padding-right: 5px; } #ygrp-mlmsg { font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial, helvetica,clean, sans-serif; *font-size: small; *font: x-small; } #ygrp-mlmsg table { font-size: inherit; font: 100%; } #ygrp-mlmsg select, input, textarea { font: 99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif; } #ygrp-mlmsg pre, code { font:115% monospace; *font-size:100%; } #ygrp-mlmsg * { line-height: 1.22em; } #ygrp-mlmsg #logo { padding-bottom: 10px; } #ygrp-msg p a { font-family: Verdana; } #ygrp-msg p#attach-count span { color: #1E66AE; font-weight: 700; } #ygrp-reco #reco-head { color: #ff7900; font-weight: 700; } #ygrp-reco { margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px; } #ygrp-sponsor #ov li a { font-size: 130%; text-decoration: none; } #ygrp-sponsor #ov li { font-size: 77%; list-style-type: square; padding: 6px 0; }=20 #ygrp-sponsor #ov ul { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 8px; } #ygrp-text { font-family: Georgia; } #ygrp-text p { margin: 0 0 1em 0; } #ygrp-text tt { font-size: 120%; } #ygrp-vital ul li:last-child { border-right: none !important;=20 }=20 --> </style> </head> <!--~-|**|PrettyHtmlEnd|**|-~--> </html> <!-- end group email --> --Apple-Mail-124--1053761357--