On 8/29/2012 2:08 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2012/8/29 Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net
<mailto:stephe...@charter.net>>
On 8/28/2012 4:02 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 8/28/2012 12:50 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
Not at all. You need only a Turing universal system, and they
abound in arithmetic.
This universality, as you yourself define it, ensures that
all copies are identical and this by the principle of
indiscernible are one and the same mind. There is no plurality
generated unless there is a necessitation of a physical state
association to a mind, but this would contradict comp.
No I it doesn't contradict comp, because the associated physics
isn't ontologically primitive, it's part of what is generated by
the UD.
Hi Brent,
Until there is a precise explanation of what this phrase
"generation by the UD" might mean, we have just a repeated
meaningless combinations of letters appearing on our computer
monitors.
But I think it is right that there must be an associated
physics, that 'mind' cannot exist independent of a physical world
it experiences.
Please explain this to Bruno, as it is that I am complaining
about in his step 8.
I don't recall Bruno ever talking about free floating minds. The only
thing he said is that the physical world result of the indeterminacy
on the infinite set of computations that goes through our current
state (the one assumed perfectly captured at the right substitution
level) that diverge on the next step.
Quentin
Hi Quentin,
You are technically correct, but that merely sidesteps the point.
The problem that I am trying to overcome is the non-uniqueness of
Godel numberings. There are an infinite number of currect states (of
which "our current state" is one) and each of these has an infinite
number of computations running though them. I agree with this piece of
the idea, btw. The states are identical to each other in the sense that
there is nothing that distinguishes them so we need a mechanism that
relates them in a non-trivial way.
What I am considering is a way to define orderings on them; a way
to daisy chain them by defining the fixed point of one (a spacial point)
to be not a fixed point on the next one. There is a rule involved that
relates the possibility of a state to be a fixed point to whether or not
it was previously, thereby setting up a precedent rule.
The key is to use the use of a constant by a non-standard model of
arithmetic as a one-time fixed point (like a unique one time cypher for
the Godel numbering), so that we can use the plurality of non-equivalent
non-standard models as a boon and not a curse. We end up with strings of
strongly related models and a nice way to solve the white rabbit problem.
Of course whether it must be a physical world exactly like ours
or wildly different is the 'white rabbit' problem.
Have you noticed that I am discussing a solution to the white
rabbit problem using ideas from game theory?
--
Onward!
Stephen
http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/Outlaw.html
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
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.
