On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 11:31 AM Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
*> (and I infer “to support genuine consciousness”).* And every time in the history of the world a change in consciousness resulted in a change in the physical state of a brain and a change in the physical state of a brain resulted in a change in consciousness. *> If not, then it is even more weird why you want for matter, given that > the computation are realised in arithmetic,* And not once in the history of the world has anyone observed a computation being made in nothing but a change in arithmetic. In fact nobody has ever observed a change in arithmetic period. >>> the whole video game is executed through pure number relation > > >> Incorrect. The whole video game is executed through >> voltage differences in the microprocessor. > > > *You can implement it,* You've got it backwards. The numbers don't emulate the voltages in the microprocessor, the voltages in the microprocessor emulate the numbers. >> We can use the language of mathematics to help us understand how those >> voltage differences effect each other, and we can if we wish interpret >> those voltage differences as numbers. > > *> In your theory which assumes a physical universe.* The only thing I assume is that if something works then it works and if something doesn't work then it doesn't work. Making calculations with the help of matter works, making calculations without matter doesn't work. And that is your cue to refute what I just said by referring to a textbook that will never be able to calculate 2+2. >>> > *See the combinator thread for a precise disproof of this.* >> Ah yes, that legendary post > > >*Ad hominem. Boring.* What's boring is your referring to posts that don't exist, your constant whining and using that incredibly pompous Latin phrase. >> post of yours that plugs all the holes in your theory and proves > that everything I've said is wrong, the post that you've been talking about > for the better part of a decade, the post that NOBODY HAS EVER SEEN. *> I just said that I have proven that the giving of the lambda expressions > [x][y]x (which does the same job as K) and [x][y][z]xz(yz) * I agree, "[x][y]x" does indeed *do* the same job as "K) and [x][y][z]xz(yz)" because both ASCII sequences *do* precisely NOTHING and 0=0 so they both *do* exactly the same thing. Nothing. >>The logical operation of every computer ever made can be reduced to a >> Turing Machine. > > >*True but irrelevant.* How in the world is that fact irrelevant?! *> Actually it makes my point, but usually, thanks to our physical laws > (and transistors) the boolean operation will be used to simulate a Turing > machines.* Boolean operations don't simulate Turing Machines, Turing Machines simulate Boolean operations. >> Ironically to rebut my accusation that you keep changing the meaning of >> "Aristotle theology" you introduced the concept of "Aristotle's >> second God"; I've never heard anybody mention that before, but I admit you >> know more about Greek silly ideas than I do. > > > *The first God is Aristotle first mover it is *[...] Bruno, I did ask you not to tell me, I've given up keeping track of your constantly mutating definitions of common words and invented phrases and acronyms used by nobody but you. John K Clark -- 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/CAJPayv1d7GdYOeL1hpk9EPU0pSni-gyqs48T7f%3D8%3DxMdPUnJLA%40mail.gmail.com.
