Liz, If Liz had actually been following my and Jesse's lengthly discussion she would know her comment below isn't true. But of course truth isn't one of Liz's strong points, it generally comes in second to spite....
The truth is that Jesse has very patiently and logically been trying to find flaws in my theory of P-time, either in the form of internal inconsistencies or inconsistencies with relativity, an effort I greatly appreciate as it enables me to clarify the arguments for the theory. So far, after trying at length, he hasn't been able to come up with a single inconsistency, though there is one suggestion we are still discussing. He still doesn't accept the theory of course, that would be a traumatic paradigm shift for an avowed block universe believer, but at least I hope to eventually convince him, and anyone else who actually follows our discussion, that the P-time theory is a logical and consistent one. Edgar On Friday, February 14, 2014 3:41:50 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: > > On 15 February 2014 07:55, Bruno Marchal <mar...@ulb.ac.be > <javascript:>>wrote: > >> On 14 Feb 2014, at 01:38, LizR wrote: >> >> On 14 February 2014 13:33, Russell Standish >> <li...@hpcoders.com.au<javascript:> >> > wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 12:14:18PM +1300, LizR wrote: >>> > It seems to me that the situation summarises as follows. >>> > >>> > Craig disagrees with the axioms of comp, in particular with "Yes >>> Doctor" >>> > and hence parts company with Bruno at step 0. >>> > >>> > Edgar agrees with "Yes Doctor" (because in his view consciousness is >>> the >>> > product of a computation) and hence, if he is going to disagree with >>> comp, >>> > needs to find a flaw in Bruno's other axioms or his logical chain of >>> > inferences. I suspect the weak link to attack here *might* be Peano >>> > arithmetic... >>> >>> I don't see why - with the Church thesis, Peano arithmetic is just as >>> good as any other system capable of universal computation. >>> >> >> That comment isn't my opinion, it was intended for Edgar. Since he thinks >> "human maths" is different to "reality maths", it seems like the obvious >> starting point (for him) if he's going to disagree with comp. >> >> That explains why he seems unable to define what he meant by >> "computational space". >> >> Yes. I was speaking purely within my attempts to understand Edgar's > ontology.... although I don't have anything like the patience and fortitude > of Jesse, who has politely and meticulously deconstructed everything Edgar > has claimed. I believe he may even be eligible for a Bruno - the everything > list's award for anyone who can continue to be cool and rational against > extraordinary odds. > > -- 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.
