On 15 Sep 2016, at 13:44, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 15 September 2016 at 05:25, Stephen Paul King <stephe...@provensecure.com
> wrote:
Hi Stathis,
I really like this explanation of supervenience. I only worry
that we need a lot more detail, of how exactly "A and B are
unaffected if the timing, order or duration of a and b are changed."
works. AFAIK, this requirement looks a lot like mutual independence,
but it clearly can not be. There must be a non-zero probability of
transitions within the processes at each level of the tower,
something like a 'time' at each.
Information about timing, order or duration of a and b that does not
change a and b cannot change A and B either. This follows from the
definition of supervenience.
That brings me to my next question: Where do we get the
inequality of entropy when it is NOT at equilibrium for a system.
Deriving an arrow of time is not just a matter of figuring out how
to chain labels in observer moments, we need an actual transition
from one state to another in our theory.
Does anyone here have a nice explanation of Markov Processes that
they could point me to?
If there are real processes occurring in real time, this is not
necessarily relevant to the supervenient mental processes. A future
mental state could be computed in real time before a past mental
state; it could have happened to you right now, and you wouldn't
know. Thus, even if there is a real world, with real time and an
arrow of time, the subjective world is timeless.
OK. In the 3-1 picture, where we look at the cloud of true (and
prouvable) sigma_1 sentences, that seems quite reasonable.
Before smoking salvia, I would have added: but *only* in the 3-1
picture. I would have defended the idea that in the 1p picture, the
(1p) subjective experience is bounded to get some duration/subjective-
time aspects, like Brouwer, Bergson, Dogen and other Heracliteans
seemed to claim, and even like the universal machine seems to claim
([]p & p, the 1p, leads to a logic of intuitionist time) but salvia
succeeded in making me doubt about this. Salvia can be *quite*
dissociative.
Still today, I doubt that consciousness without time makes subjective
sense, but I believe there might be an altered consciousness state
where we feel to live the contrary. Coming back from that state is a
highly surprising and highly confusing experience. We can memorize
only a piece of that coming back.
Bruno
--
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.
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.
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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
