Craig, I also suspect Bruno's math skills are superior to mine, but his understanding of the place of math in reality seems pretty deficient, or perhaps just rigid.
As I've pointed out his 8 steps may well be mathematically consistent but that doesn't mean they have anything to do with the fundamental structure of reality at all. To meaningfully apply a purely mathematical or logical proof to reality, one must establish an actual correspondence of the variables in the proof to actual variables of reality. I don't see Bruno doing that at all. There is no way that anything happens in his static Platonia. And there is no method of selecting the structure of our actual universe from what is apparently his all possible universes. He told us his theory doesn't predict the fine tuning, as this type of theory must, because the fine tuning is not important in hi view. Your abacus example is A Propos to the points in my post. The important insight in my post is that all R-bits, that make up all the information that constitutes the current state of the universe, are identical. It is the RELATIONSHIPS of these R-bits, not the R-bits themselves that give us the H-numbers used in H-math. This is obvious from a proper understanding of binary numbers in particular, in which it is the bits that are clearly elemental, and all numbers are relationships of a single type of bit, rather than being elemental in themselves. H-math (and Bruno) assumes that these individual numbers are what is elemental and actually real and extant in reality. That there is some elemental thing called prime number 17 that is an actual fixed unalterable component of fundamental reality. I don't see anyway that makes sense, or is necessary. it confuses understanding of actual reality... What actually exists fundamentally, it seems to me, is a finite number of identical R-bits, rather than H-math numbers. It is unclear to what extent the R-math that actually computes reality in terms of these R-bits, needs any concepts like H-numbers, but to the extent it does, these are relationships, part of R-math, rather than elemental R-numbers themselves. R-numbers are just the set of all identical R-bits among which R-math can define the (small?) set of relationships it needs to compute actual reality. It is in this sense that I stated that all actual R-numbers are all just the identical R-bits which are just related and computed into all the information that constitutes the universe. in this sense then everything can be said to be composed of numbers=bits, and only of numbers=bits. Or more properly of numbers=bits and their relationships. Edgar On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 3:07:48 PM UTC-5, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 11:57:11 AM UTC-5, Edgar L. Owen wrote: >> >> Bruno, and Craig, >> >> Computational reality doesn't need any notion of primes, or 17 is a >> prime. In fact I don't see any reason why reality needs any concept even of >> 17 to compute its current state. If this is true then individual numbers >> such as 17 are not necessary for reality to compute the universe. I suspect >> what reality does is more 1:1 comparisons. >> >> E.g. when reality makes a computation to conserve and redistribute >> particle properties among the outgoing particles of a particle interaction, >> it doesn't need to count up 17 of anything, it just has to know they are >> all distributed which it can do with simple 1;1 comparisons. It can do that >> by 1:1 comparisons, not by any notion of numbers such as 1, 2, or 17 much >> less any notion of primes. >> > > I suspect that in this regard Bruno may have more insight, but > superficially I agree with you. Just as an abacus can be used to perform > H-Math functions, on a physical level, all that is happening is that beads > are sliding to one side or another (R-Math?). I consider H-Math not to be > limited to humans, but more along the lines of a Bruno-Platonic set of all > possible groupings of quantitative patterns. As enormous as that UD is, it > is still, in my view, only a language of theoretical relations, not a > concrete presence in the universe. What I see with comp is that, if human > quality of consciousness were a calendar, comp takes the R-Math of January > and the H-Math of December and assumes that February through November will > be filled in automatically. What I see instead is that February through > November cannot be substituted with low level 1:1 comparisons or high level > eternal schemas, but instead must be developed in real time through real > experiences. There can be no skipping experiences, so that even a fish does > not have the experience of a fish if it does not arise from a context of > inheriting lifetimes from invertebrate ancestors. I suspect that these > experiences are not available in any structures to be simulated or modeled. > > Craig > > >> Ordinal and cardinal number, and all their properties such as odd, even >> or prime are thus characteristic of human H-math, not of the actual R-math >> of reality that actually computes the current state of the universe, at >> least so far as I can see. >> >> Edgar >> >> >> >> On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 11:36:29 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 12 Feb 2014, at 13:24, Craig Weinberg wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 5:18:21 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 11 Feb 2014, at 19:58, Craig Weinberg wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Our internal experience is informed directly by opportunities for >>>> quasi-veridical sensory entanglement from within, without, and beyond our >>>> neurology. It is the idea of information and numbers which is a >>>> meta-simulative technology that allows us to project our control beyond >>>> our >>>> physical limitations. Computation accelerates and amplifies existing >>>> tendencies of individual and collective users, both threatening and >>>> supporting our survival. >>>> >>>> >>>> Locally. But to do a scientific (modest and sharbale) theory, we need >>>> to start from 3p agreement, and usually scientists agree with statements >>>> like 17 is prime, but not on sense, quasi-veridical, entanglement, etc. >>>> >>> >>> I agree that it is an important political consideration, but I don't >>> think it is a scientific consideration. At one time the starting point >>> statements that authorities agree with were found in the book of Genesis. >>> >>> >>> >>> The analogy does not work, because the statement that 17 is a prime >>> number is everything but political. But if you want start a party on the >>> idea that 17 is not prime, you are free to make it political. You will need >>> propaganda, torture, terror, and many things like that to keep power, but >>> then why not, we are used to this. >>> >>> My point was only that if you want to communicate something to others, >>> you have to adopt a language they understand, and start your theory from >>> statement on which they can agree "for the sake of the argument or not" >>> (that's private for the others). >>> >>> If not, all what you do is already a sort of propaganda. I'm afraid. >>> >>> Bruno >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Craig >>> >>> >>>> Bruno >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Craig >>>> >>>> >>>>> Edgar >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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-li...@googlegroups.com. >>>> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@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-li...@googlegroups.com. >>> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@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-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.
