On 26 Mar 2015, at 13:06, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2015-03-26 13:02 GMT+01:00 Bruce Kellett <bhkell...@optusnet.com.au>:
Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2015-03-26 12:13 GMT+01:00 Bruce Kellett <bhkell...@optusnet.com.au
Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2015-03-26 8:05 GMT+01:00 Bruce Kellett
This comes back to my original question: since all
possible
programs
are run by the dovetailer, how do we ensure that conscious
beings
see an ordered and predictable world. Only a set of
measure zero
among all possible programs would give that result.
Yes, it seems to me, we should see white noise, but maybe a
selection attribute must be in play... like an anthropic
argument.
Anthropic arguments are not going to work with computationalism
because there is no basis on which you can assume underlying
deterministic physical laws.
It seems to me it works relatively.... consciousness like ours can
only experiment worls ordered like ours... even if almost all dreams/
worlds produced by mathematics are not like that and do not allow of
consciousness like ours, as you can only experience worlds like
ours, it's no magic that you do... like with Quantum Immortality,
you cannot experience being dead, so no wonder you find yourself
alive, even if in almost all worlds you're dead (or not existing at
all).
But we do not need the degree of order that we observe. We could
survive perfectly well with a reasonable number of miracles -- laws
that don't quite work always. And there are vastly more possible
worlds of that sort than those that are strictly deterministic. The
measure problem gets you every time.
Well we don't know that we could survive in such world...but even,
if MWI is correct, most instances of me goes everytime in such
worlds... and some of us don't, why wonder that it's a miracle when
it's a given there will always be a me in a non magic world ? I
wonder why I'm not in a magic world... because I'm not.
OK. That's why when I ask the universal Löbian u, I ask it to abstract
from the cul-de-sac world, where magic like [](santa-Klauss exist)
becomes true, or []("0=1"). That abstraction is the move from []p to
[]p & <>p. You do it also with the stronger move []p to []p & p.
Those moves, limited to the sigma_1 arithmetical truth, that the
observers assumed, The realm of RA, + those intensional nuance suggest
the structure on which the observable get permanent and sharable, but
also the no sharable part.
That's only a beginning of a solution. It might fail, but up to now,
the observable seem to have good quantization making them already
close to quantum logics, algebra of projectors.
Bruno
Quentin
Bruce
--
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/d/optout.
--
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy
Batty/Rutger Hauer)
--
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/d/optout.
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/d/optout.
