On Friday, June 8, 2012 1:36:31 PM UTC-7, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > On Jun 8, 3:00 pm, Pzomby <htra...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Using mathematics, computations and symbols; human embodied > > consciousness can (using computers) create models, simulations, > > emulations, depictions, replications, representations etc. of > > observations of the physical universe and its processes. > > We can create models for ourselves, but nothing else in the universe > reads them that way. > > > > > This assumes that the actual observable physical universe is > > exemplified by, and is, instantiations of, mathematics and > > computations. > > > > 1) Does this mean that mathematics is *en-coded* as formulas in matter > > and energy? > > If so that would mean that mathematics is either: > > a) encoded in something other than mathematics - if so, whatever it is > that math can be encoded into (matter) makes encoding redundant and > unexplainable. If you have something other than math, then why does > math need to be encoded as it? > > b) encoded as some other mathematical formula - if so, then the > appearance of the encoded non-math is redundant and unexplainable. > > > > > 2) If so, are models, simulations, emulations, depictions, > > replications, representations, a mathematical computational *decoding* > > of an *en-coded* mathematical physical reality? > > They are a partial decoding. The modeling process allows our mind to > recover some essential sense experience of the physics, thereby > superimposing a supersignifying abstraction layer on our experience of > it's reality. > > My view in a nutshell: > > Sense is not an emergent property of information. > > Significance is a recovered property* of sense. > > Thanks for your input. Some of what you state I follow, but some I do > not, but I set that aside. > > > > To further clarify: The best analogy as to what I was considering is the > role of DNA in biological processes. DNA is coded by/with classified amino > acids that eventually through time and growth display the physical results > of the coding. Interpreting the DNA code or *decoding* gives rise to > theoretical mathematically described simulations, emulations or models, etc > of a physical body containing a physical brain. > > > > DNA is a dimensional physical exemplification or instantiation that can be > *decoded* and then be simulated or modeled as a complete body & brain (if > there is such a thing). > > > > If it is assumed the brain is a natural computer, the DNA should contain > an encoded version of that same brain. >
> This in turn gives rise to the questions of interpretations or maybe more > importantly misinterpretations (beliefs) by the brain (natural computer) of > what the 6 senses observe. > > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/ml2ND3NB_XAJ. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
