On 10 Dec 2013, at 12:15, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
2013/12/10 Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be>
On 10 Dec 2013, at 10:40, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
It seems to me that your invocation of platonism is wrong. For
Plato
the reality is a shadow of the perfect world of ideas, universals
that we can "remember" by anamnesis.
OK.
But for you reality is a partial dream,
Not at all.
Only physical reality. And it is not "one" dream, it is what
result
from an infinity of dreams, by the FPI on arithmetic.
(FPI = first person indeterminacy, *on* the complete UD
emulation in
arithmetic).
but coherent or "robust" product of the aleatory Dovetailer
Machine,
+ The FPI.
and sometimes we have access to that nonsense by our dreams and
hallucinations.
By comp, and the FPI on all computations going through our comp
state (which exists theoretically, as we work in the comp theory).
So in fact the reality, as the the platonic realm is just the
opposite of the one of the UDA: it is full of structure and
perfect,
while the UDA produces every kind of thing possible.
Only computations. Computer science shows this to be a complex
mathematical structure, structured differently from the different
points of view of a machines, which themselves obeys the non
trivial
laws of self-reference. It is full of structure.
Where that structure come from?
They follow from the laws of addition and multiplication and logic,
basically from:
0 ≠ s(x)
s(x) = s(y) -> x = y
x+0 = x
x+s(y) = s(x+y)
x*0=0
x*s(y)=(x*y)+x
The TOE has no other axioms. (Only definitions).
Note that most scientific theories admit those axioms.
I see all computatons possible coming from the UDA,
You mean the UD (the universal dovetailer). UDA is for the "UD
Argument" (UDA is only the name of a deductive argument based on
the
notion of Universal Dovetailing).
some of them with structure, some of them do not.
That is ambiguous. They all have some structure. But I am OK, as
some
have internal and external (to them, relatively) random data, also.
It is isomorphic to some subset of the mathematical multiverse
Too much fuzzy. It depends of your starting assumption.
"multiverse"
is usually used in the context of QM. But neither QM, nor "~QM" is
assumed in the UD Argument.
The UD argument is deductive (not entirely in step 8 as it is
intended
to apply on 'reality' and use Occam razor). It shows that if you
survive with a digital brain, then you survive in the infinitely
many
arithmetical brain, and physics, to remain a stable appearance
has no
choice to "exploit" an infinite self-multiplication.
UDA reduces partially the mind-body problem (my job) to a body
problem
in arithmetic.
It is a problem. Not a solution of a problem (except that in the
arithmetical translation of the UDA (AUDA), we can already
interview
the universal machine (Löbian one) on that problem, and they tell
us
that Plato seems less foolish than Aristotle.
or the boltzmann aleatory structures.
Same remark. Keep in mind that if we accept the existence of a
physical reality, we "meta-reason" to find the deepest laws of
reality, and be open that physics might not be the fundamental
theory.
Or can be emulated by UDA.
Yes. Note that the UD emulation is entirely deterministic (in the
3p),
and hopefully partially deterministic in the 1p (plural) view.
The only additional merit is the use of few initial assumptions.
I think you miss the point. I am just saying that if comp is
correct,
then adding anything to those initial assumption is a redundant
form
of conceptual treachery.
But to emulate everithing possible with few assumptions is not a
merit IMHO.
You do miss the point. With all my respect.
The emulation is only a manner of formulating the problem
precisely,
that is, mathematically.
I´m not trying to be harsh.
No problem. I could look like a philosopher, defending some theory.
But that's not what I do, and did.
I am a logician, and computer scientist, explaining that if you say
"yes" to the comp doctor, then (assuming you have enough logical
cognitive ability) to reduce the comp mind body problem into body
problem in arithmetic.
Then I show that we can interview universal machine having such
cognitive ability, translating indeed the problem into a sequence
of
problems in arithmetic.
At first sight Plotinus and the mystics are closer to the Löbian
numbers than Aristotle. I mean in term of coherent whole.
I just want to put my impressions in words. The platoninc world
of
ideas is then ONE of the many possible infinite whoknows that the
UDA can produce.
Well, it is just the sigma_1 complete part of a vastly bigger
arithmetical reality (pi_1, sigma_24, pi_1000, etc.))
It is important to keep in mind the difference between the
computable
part of the arithmetical reality, with the non computable part, and
the non provable part, by any machines, even ZF+kappa, etc.
The self reference, the diofantic equations etc are tentative ways
to stablish a limit to that exuberance, but either you postulate
UDA
in its completeness and everithing produced from UDA exist and
therefore I´m right and the order is only apparent and local,
like
in the multiverse hypothesis(that i find equaly unsatisfactory) or
you add additional axioms.
Comp makes it possible to work entirely in arithmetic. This is a
theorem in computer science. Even without Church thesis.
You must understand that I am not trying to sell you a new
theory. I
just show that in an older "banal", seemingly innocent, but
commonly
believed or intuited theory, Milinda-Descartes "Mechanism", Church
thesis makes it possible, and necessary (that's the point), to
reduce
the mind-body problem into a purely arithmetical universal self-
justification problem, which includes way to distinguishing the
many
points of view, including the physical.
You can understand the conclusion, before understanding that comp
leads to that conclusion. For this, you have to be open minded for
non
materialist, or non physicalist fundamental reality, like the
arithmetical reality, which contains the many meta-arithmetical
realities.
I transform a problem into another, mathematical problem. Then I
solve
the propositional part of the many points of view, including the
physical, so we can compare with 'nature'. The presence of three
arithmetical quantizations give hope to show that the arithmetical
winner is a quantum computer, but that's remain an open problem.
The subject is difficult, and I might have been mistaken, but in
principle, it concerns something which you should understand, not
taken as a new theory.
It is a big problem for the computationalist, but then you ask the
machines, and they expected that!
UD is a not a solution. It is a precise problem, which confronts
all
universal numbers, and many "inside" things in arithmetic.
Have you read the sane04 paper, or the new one?
UDA can be understood by any good willing human reasoner. I think.
AUDA necessitates familiarity with mathematical logic and computer
science.
AUDA shows that UDA can be understood by any good willing universal
number.
But it is a problem, not a solution, although AUDA provides the
solutions at the propositional level, in the ideal case of sound
arithmetical machines, admitting (us) the standard theory of
knowledge
(S4).
With comp we have to extend the embedding of the physicist in the
physical reality by an embedding of the mathematician in the
mathematical reality. But that was what Gödel made, by showing how
to
arithmetized meta-arithmetic. With comp, that embedding of the
machines in the arithmetical reality is enough to formulate the
problem precisely.
The hard work has been done by Gödel, Löb, Grzegorczyk, Solovay,
and
Visser (and many others).
Bruno
So at the end while Plato pressuposes order the UDA pressuposes
that
there are tree elements that produce everithing that exist, and
those that does not exist.
I assume comp, and then reason. Like Plato we presuppose order
(indeed, brought by arithmetic: we know that the order in
arithmetic
is *very* rich, and not completely accessible by *any* effective
theory).
Comp let us just assume no more order than there is in arithmetic,
at he basic ontological (assumed) level..
Al the end there are two theories of everithing: In the beginning
there was order and mind
That is exactly what you get by assuming comp. In the 'beginning'
you have order (the additive/multiplicative structure of the
numbers) and the emerging mind from it (the universal
consciousness
that you associate to all universal numbers in arithmetic, by
comp,
and which is differentiating through the indexical (self-
referential) FPI).
or at the beginning there was some kind of primitive matter and
chaos. Plato theory is in the first case.
Yes. No primitive matter, and the full rich order of the numbers
(or
of any Turing universal system).
Yours appears to be in the second.
Not at all. There is no assumed matter, and we assume the order
needed to make sense of computations and Church thesis. You are
right that there is some chaos, but that is part of the (new)
world
of ideas.
What is your route from chaos to Plato?
The One of the Parmenides (used by Plotinus) = arithmetical truth
(that is full order far beyond what any machine can grasped).
Chaos
can be there, like in the prime numbers, but there is also a lot
of
music. That chaos is there is what is new in Platonia, but Plato
could not be aware of Gödel.
The Noùs (Plato's universe of ideas) is given by the arithmetical
truth, made partially intelligible by the universal numbers.
The Soul (Plato's soul, Plotinus' universal soul) is given by the
conjunction/intersection of the One, and the Noùs.
Intelligible Matter is given by the conjunction of the Noùs and
the
existence of a reality (self-consistency, Dt).
Sensible Matter is given by the conjunction of intelligible matter
and the One.
More on this in the Plotinus' paper. Comp rehabilitates not just
Plato, but Pythagorus (thanks to Church thesis).
Bruno
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-
list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
Alberto.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-
list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an
email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-
l...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
