On 8/4/2016 2:57 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 4 August 2016 at 11:16, Brent Meeker <meeke...@verizon.net
<mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:
On 8/3/2016 5:55 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 3 August 2016 at 16:02, Brent Meeker <meeke...@verizon.net
<mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:
On 8/2/2016 10:19 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Wednesday, 3 August 2016, Brent Meeker
<meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
On 8/2/2016 3:29 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Wednesday, 3 August 2016, Brent Meeker
<meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
On 8/2/2016 6:15 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
It's not that it can't, but rather that it
doesn't, and if it does then that would require
some extra physical explanation, a radio link
between brains or something.
That's what I mean by illegitimately appealing to
physics while claiming that physics must be derived
from computation of consciousness.
Whatever theory we propose must be consistent with
observation.
But, "if it does then*/that would require some extra
physical explanation/*, a radio link between brains or
something." Is not an observation, it's an assumption
that all information transfer must be physical.
There is no convincing evidence for telepathic
communication, so a theory that predicts it should occur
would have to explain why we don't observe it.
Yes, and physical theories of consciousness do that quite
well. But computationalist theories of consciousness can't
invoke the physics they're trying to derive.
Bruno, I believe, proposes that his theory accounts for the
universe that we observe.
ISTM his argument is of the form:
1) Consciousness is instantiated by certain computation.
2) All possible computation is realized by a UDA that exists
because arithmetic is true.
3) Then the conscious thoughts that constitute our experience of a
physical world are among those instantiated by the UDA and the
physical world need not be anything more than threads of those
computations that exhibit the consistent patterns which we explain
as an external reality.
The problem I have with this is that "arithmetic is true" doesn't
make anything, much less a UDA, exist. And the conclusion (3) just
brings in Everett's measure problem amplified to the nth degree.
It explains too much as "existing" and doesn't assign
probabilities to anything. So far as I can tell Bruno is just
relying on 1-3 as a "proof" that the physics we observe MUST BE
derived from the UDA.
The problem with (3) is a general problem with multiverses. A single,
infinite universe is an example of a multiverse theory, since there
will be infinite copies of everything and every possible variation of
everything, including your brain and your mind.
That implicitly assumes a digital universe, yet the theory that suggests
it, quantum mechanics, is based on continua; which is why I don't take
"the multiverse" too seriously.
We live in an orderly world with consistent physical laws. It seems to
me that you are suggesting that if everything possible existed then we
would not live in such an orderly world,
Unless the worlds were separated in some way, which current physical
theories provide - but which is not explicable if you divorce conscious
thoughts from physics.
Brent
and we would not be able to have coherent thoughts. So the fact that
we do have coherent thoughts implies that multiverses cannot exist,
and we must live in a finite universe. That seems a lot to conclude
from the mere fact that you are able to think.
--
Stathis Papaioannou
--
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
<mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.