> On 9 May 2019, at 19:57, Philip Thrift <cloudver...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 8:22:38 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 9 May 2019, at 13:03, Philip Thrift <cloud...@gmail.com <javascript:>> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 5:34:29 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 3 May 2019, at 16:10, cloud...@gmail.com <> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> The general response here is that there has never existed a program that >>> has executed outside a computer. And computers are made of matter. >> >> That is false. Programs have been discovered in arithmetic, like prime >> numbers. Computations are number relation (the sigma_1 one). >> >> “ >> >> Who discovered arithmetic and where is it? > > Arithmetic is known by human before they developed written language, and the > first proof of sophisticated result, are 5000 years old, with the tablets > showing those ancient people got all Pythagorean triples. > > > >> >> I get the idea that Arthur Conan Doyle "discovered" Sherlock Holmes, and he >> "is" in books and people's brains (imaginations). > > Arithmetic has been found independently by Chinese, Indian, europeans, etc. > Everyone agree on all arithmetical proposition, without any exception. It is > used all the time, everyday, and your laptop would cease functioning if only > one arithmetical proposition would be false. Sherlock Holmes is a creation of > the mind by Doyle. You can meet human approximating him, but even if they > look very similar, it is not Sherlock Holmes, by definition. > > >> >> But arithmetic actually has no more reality than that, outside of its >> operations in brains and man-made things. One can say DNA or other natural >> things is "doing" arithmetic and so forth. That kind of thing. >> >> But where is this thing you call arithmetic? > > Numbers, and arithmetical relation are out of the category of things to which > “where” applies, unless you define “where” in some arithmetical sense, like > when we say that 10^100 is far from 0, but of course, this is not used in the > physical sense. > > On the contrary, the physical “whereness” is derived from mechanism and > arithmetic. > > The theory of everything is explicitly given by classical logic + > > 1) 0 ≠ s(x) > 2) x ≠ y -> s(x) ≠ s(y) > 3) x ≠ 0 -> Ey(x = s(y)) > 4) x+0 = x > 5) x+s(y) = s(x+y) > 6) x*0=0 > 7) x*s(y)=(x*y)+x > > If you eliminate just one axiom from that theory, you get very interesting > theories, but none is Turing complete. > > We can use anything Turing equivalent. I have proven recently and explicitly > on this list that the following theory is Turing complete: > > 1) If A = B and A = C, then B = C > 2) If A = B then AC = BC > 3) If A = B then CA = CB > 4) KAB = A > 5) SABC = AC(BC) > > Those two theories lead to the same machine theology, and thus the same > physics, and up to now, it fits with Nature, and explains entirely what is > consciousness and where it comes from. > > Bruno > > > > > > I still don't get how a unique physics comes out of a particular Theory Of > Arithmetic (TOA) —
Any universal machinery would do. Better to not idolise the number and arithmetic. The theology of the universal number (or universal combinator, or universal caffe-bar machine, or the universal Lisp program, or the universal portion of the physical laws, like brain and computers, bit also cells, etc.) can do. I use the natural numbers, because most people understand directly the axioms, as they are taught in primary school. But it is longer tp prove the universality of (N, s, 0, +, x) than for the combinators. I did shows this explicitly in the thread “combinators”. > Is a theory of dark matter already lurking within TOA ready to be derived? The goal was to explain were consciousness and matter comes from, in a verifiable way, but for physics, we have got only that it has to exist, be non trivial, non boolean and quantum like, with a highly symmetrical core where information cannot be eliminated. > -- but as for arithmetic being "universal" among cultures, arithmetical > abilities are also found in other animals, like birds. Yes. And pigeon are better than human is evaluating some (very particular) arithmetical proposition. I am glad you agree with this. Some argue against the “objectiveness” of elementary arithmetical reality by pointing that some humans have not yet the notion.. This has been disproved, if I remember well. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_intelligence > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_intelligence> > > > Just as there is panexperientialism -- experientiality at various (proto) > levels is found universally in all matter Below virus, I am not even sure what that could mean. With mechanism, some digital code has to play a role. The continuum needs the waves to get the natural numbers, and listen to the music of the prime, or the cacophony of the baby universal numbers …. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panpsychism#Panexperientialism > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panpsychism#Panexperientialism> > > -- and panlinguisticism -- ditto language -- there is panarithmeticalism. > > Matter has all these aspects: experiential, grammatical, arithmetical. Yes, and other aspect too, at least when we derive matter from the imagination of numbers. It is like in Proclos, from the One you get an arithmogony, then a psychogony, and then a cosmogony. Matter is when God lose control, and can no more predict something to you, like its illustrated with the first person indeterminacy. You might try the thought experience, to see what I mean. Bruno PS I see there are still a full discussion in this thread. Will read later. Apology for the (3p or 1pp!) delays ... > > @philipthrift > > > > > -- > 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 > <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/f7181fcd-36b3-495c-a3de-4ad89e33337b%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/f7181fcd-36b3-495c-a3de-4ad89e33337b%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/DA402AF9-90B7-489B-AA64-12F4B3F71F19%40ulb.ac.be.
