Hi Lee,
To split a hair... ;-)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Corbin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <everything-list@eskimo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 9:47 PM
Subject: The Time Deniers
snip
I am still at the point where I cannot quite imagine how a
huge nest of bit strings (say all the real numbers between
0 and 1) manages to (in stasis) emulate all possible
conscious experiences of all possible entities. But I
still have an open mind.
I don't have a problem with that statement given that "in principle":
1) There is at least one Real number that is Identical to the bitstring (of
an algorithm) that IF implemented would render a simulation that is
Identical to some particular conscious experience.
2) All possible conscious experiences have a simulating/emulating/rendering
algorithm that is isomorphic to some Real number.
I do have a problem with the Time Deniers in that I find their
postulation that the mere ab initio existence of the Real Numbers, ala
Mathematical Platonism, is sufficient to necessitate the unassailable fact
(1st person for me - incorrigibility!) that I am having a conscious
experience of typing these words on my computer.
There is a huge difference in kind between "existing" and "emulating".
Existing is atemporal by definition since existence can not depend on any
other property. Emulations involve some notion of a process and such are
temporal. The idea that a process, of any kind, can "occur" requires some
measure of both transitivity and duration.
The mere *existence* of a process only speaks to its potential for
occurrence.
Kindest regards,
Stephen
