On 6/8/2015 4:13 PM, LizR wrote:
On 9 June 2015 at 05:29, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:

    On 6/8/2015 1:03 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

    Hmm.... Let us be precise. That the computation take place in arithmetic is 
a
    mathematical fact that nobody doubt today. UDA explains only that we cannot 
use a
    notion of primitive matter for making "more real" some computations in 
place of
    others. It makes the physics supervening on "all computations in 
arithmetic".
    But my computer does some computations and not others.  So there must be 
some sense
    in which some computations are real and others aren't.  Handwaving that 
they're all
    there in arithmetic proves too much.


I don't see that. Surely the problem is that it doesn't prove /enough/ - assuming all computations exist (in some sense) in arithmetic, which I believe is "trivially" true to most mathematicians, how does this produce physics?

If you're going to use a comp style explanation, your computer isn't defining which computations are real, it's somehow being generated by all those abstract computations.

And all those abstract computations are also generating all possible instances of my computer computing all possible computations, plus many others which are not nomologically possible. So when Bruno says we cannot "use a notion of primitive matter for making "more real" some computations in place of others" my question becomes, "Ok, what can we use, because some computations ARE more real than others."

Brent

--
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.

Reply via email to