On 8/19/2018 2:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 17 Aug 2018, at 21:27, Brent Meeker <meeke...@verizon.net
<mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:
On 8/17/2018 2:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 16 Aug 2018, at 20:50, Brent Meeker <meeke...@verizon.net
<mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:
On 8/16/2018 3:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 15 Aug 2018, at 21:33, Brent Meeker <meeke...@verizon.net
<mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:
On 8/15/2018 2:52 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
And you have not recovered the quantitative aspect of the quantum structure,
I did at the propositional level, which is enough to have the quantum logic. It
is richer than the quantum logic of the physicians, so this predicts new things.
What are they?
The consequence of the Löb’s formula translated in the quantum
logical terms. Those are long and ugly formula, still beyond the
reach of my (old) theorem prover.
So they are not testable.
?
Some are testable and tested, and some are not *yet* derived, and
thus not tested, but they are testable of course. Not sure how you
arrive at your conclusion.
because you have not defined a measure on the computations of the UD.
Not yet, but I am willing to hear some constructive suggestion to progress.
Then how can you claim to have recovered quantum mechanics if you
cannot even define a probability amplitude that is linear?
Because I have recovered enough to classify those logics as
quantum logic.
That's a far cry from quantum mechanics.
But the UDA shows that if we don’t get quantum mechanics, it has to
be false, or mechanism is false. The whole point is that we can test
this.
The goal is to get a coherent picture in the computationalist frame.
Physicalism is *already* refuted.
No. It is only your version of physicalism that is refuted. The
assumption that what is physical cannot account for what is mental
because the mental is substrate independent and therefore is
independent of all substrate. The last doesn't follow.
What is a substrate?
Supporting material.
How you test its primary existence?
Whether it's existence is primary or not is irrelevant. Concrete can be
the substrate of a building whether it is primary or has a substrate of
atoms.
How does a substrate select a computation, given the mechanist first
person indeterminacy ?
Concrete doesn't necessarily select the building, it supports it. In our
particular case it seems that evolution of carbon chemistry has selected
a computation as reproductively advantageous.
Brent
Brent
Bruno
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
<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
<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.
