On 6/25/2019 9:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 24 Jun 2019, at 19:26, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List
<everything-list@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>> wrote:
On 6/24/2019 2:13 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 24 Jun 2019, at 05:27, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List
<everything-list@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>> wrote:
On 6/23/2019 1:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
That sounds a bit observer dependent.
Yes. It is. The physical reality becomes a first person plural
view of arithmetic seen by itself from the universal
number/machine perspective. An observer is just a (Löbian) machine
seen from the material modes of the self ([]p & p with p sigma_1,
or []p & <>t, or []p & <>t & p).
Which raises the question of why we each see (from the inside) the
same physical world.
It is a symptom that we are not more than universal numbers, given
that we get the conclusion that all universal machine/number have
the same physics.
How exactly "the same". Can you show that the observed physics is
the only possible physics?
Yes. Compare the physics in the head of the universal machine with the
observation. What we see, if it is does not belong to that machine’s
internal physics, but is consistent with it,
OK. Is what's in the head of the universal machine consistent with
there being three families of fermions? Is it consistent with the
Standard Model? Is it consistent with conservation of energy-momentum?
See, the problem is that you have no way saying what is or isn't in the
head of the universal machine...so almost anything may be consistent.
can be defined as the local geography-history (indexically contingent,
and usually treated with the diamond in the modes.
If there is a contradiction between the machine’s physics and the
observation, then mechanism is false, or we are in a malevolent
simulation.
Digital Mechanism provides a new powerful invariant for physics: the
physical laws are invariant for all observers, and is invariant for
the change of the ontology (combinators, numbers, etc.).
Digital mechanism explains why there is an apparent physical universe,
I don't see that explanation?
I might ask what you miss in the UDA, which shows that physics is
reduced to an indexical statistics
It doesn't "show" that, it hypothesizes that it must be so. It's like
hypothesizing God. Is God consistent with human suffering? He must be,
otherwise the hypothesis is false.
on all relative computations ((aka sigma_1 sentences, by a normal form
theorem of Kleene, and some subtleties about G* and Z*).
Then what are you missing in AUDA (the arithmetical translation of UDA
in arithmetic). The main things have been found by Goödel, Löb,
Feferman, Friedman, Boolos, Goldblatt, up to Solvay’s1976 theorem: the
discovery of G and G*.
The probability (a credibility or plausibility, actually) one is
given, for the observable, by the logic of []p & <>t. I justify this
by thought experience, Kripke semantics, and the bastard calculus in
Timeaeus and Plotinus (and got evidence that Moderatus got it already
from its interpretation of the Parmenides).
Why is not each person is a different universe, as they are in
different dreams.
I am not sure I understand the question. Each person is supported by
an infinity of computations, and they diverge, a bit like the W vs M
divergence in the self-duplication, except that it is a continuous
transformation of some sort. The person $are* in different
dream/computations, but some type of dream are sharable
But some types are not. So why are we in a sharable one? Are you
hypothesizing the there are other people who are only in unsharable
dreams? It seems you are invoking the "might theory is consistent with
everything" rule.
and long histories develops, in the limit of all first person
experience (due to the invariance of consciousness for the
arithmetical delays in the stepping of the universal dovetailer).
Finding the propositional modes of self-reference explains why we have
bodies, soul and qualia, and why we are conscious, and why we are in
front of the … unknown.
Only in some idiosyncratic meaning of "explain".
But to progress, we need to progress also in the quantified modal
logic of provability, and to better extracts Quantum Logic, etc.
It might not work. The fact is that it works up to now,
It does no work up to now. It is just sufficiently expansive that no
contradiction is apparent.
Brent
and is the only precise and testable theory addressing the Mind-Body
problem, to my knowledge.
Bruno
Brent
and why the laws of physics are really laws, and, and this is better
than physics, why the physical reality separates into sharable
quanta, and non sharable qualia.
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 view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/40792d73-e1bf-b0d2-de47-434be6bd6fce%40verizon.net
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/40792d73-e1bf-b0d2-de47-434be6bd6fce%40verizon.net?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
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 view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/25AF6181-C364-43FB-84A8-838117CFA816%40ulb.ac.be
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/25AF6181-C364-43FB-84A8-838117CFA816%40ulb.ac.be?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
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 view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/c0a8c3d2-f8ce-d547-57ee-ee6905df7bb5%40verizon.net
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/c0a8c3d2-f8ce-d547-57ee-ee6905df7bb5%40verizon.net?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
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 view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/669AE6B4-A591-4153-BC87-1B6AE3BA2D73%40ulb.ac.be
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/669AE6B4-A591-4153-BC87-1B6AE3BA2D73%40ulb.ac.be?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
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/2c2e0bf4-dfc8-9cd9-f459-7573a9f347f9%40verizon.net.
