> On 19 Jun 2021, at 13:17, smitra <smi...@zonnet.nl> wrote: > > Information is the key. Conscious agents are defined by precisely that > information that specifies the content of their consciousness. This means > that a conscious agent can never be precisely located in some physical > object, because the information that describes the conscious experience will > always be less detailed than the information present in the exact physical > description of an object such a brain. There are always going to be a very > large self localization ambiguity due to the large number of different > possible brain states that would generate exactly the same conscious > experience. So, given whatever conscious experience the agent has, the agent > could be in a very large number of physically distinct states. > > The simpler the brain and the algorithm implemented by the brain, the larger > this self-localization ambiguity becomes because smaller algorithms contain > less detailed information. Our conscious experiences localizes us very > precisely on an Earth-like planet in a solar system that is very similar to > the one we think we live in. But the fly walking on the wall of the room I'm > in right now may have some conscious experience that is exactly identical to > that of another fly walking on the wall of another house in another country > 600 years ago or on some rock in a cave 35 million year ago. > > The conscious experience of the fly I see on the all is therefore not located > in the particular fly I'm observing. This is i.m.o. the key thing you get > from identifying consciousness with information, it makes the multiverse an > essential ingredient of consciousness. This resolves paradoxes you get in > thought experiments where you consider simulating a brain in a virtual world > and then argue that since the simulation is deterministic, you could replace > the actual computer doing the computations by a device playing a recording of > the physical brain states. This argument breaks down if you take into account > the self-localization ambiguity and consider that this multiverse aspect is > an essential part of consciousness due to counterfactuals necessary to define > the algorithm being realized, which is impossible in a deterministic > single-world setting.
OK. Not only true, but it makes physics into a branch of mathematical logic, partially embedded in arithmetic (and totally embedded in the semantic of arithmetic, which of course cannot be purely arithmetical, as the machine understand already). I got the many-dreams, or many histories of the physical reality from the many computations in arithmetic well before I discovered Everett. Until that moment I was still thinking that QM was a threat on Mechanism, but of course it is only the wave collapse postulate which is contradictory with Mechanism. We cannot make a computation disappear like we cannot make a number disappear… Bruno > > Saibal > > > On 18-06-2021 20:46, Jason Resch wrote: >> In your opinion who has offered the best theory of consciousness to >> date, or who do you agree with most? Would you say you agree with them >> wholeheartedly or do you find points if disagreement? >> I am seeing several related thoughts commonly expressed, but not sure >> which one or which combination is right. For example: >> Hofstadter/Marchal: self-reference is key >> Tononi/Tegmark: information is key >> Dennett/Chalmers: function is key >> To me all seem potentially valid, and perhaps all three are needed in >> some combination. I'm curious to hear what other viewpoints exist or >> if there are other candidates for the "secret sauce" behind >> consciousness I might have missed. >> Jason >> -- >> 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/CA%2BBCJUik%3Du724L6JxAKi0gq-rPfV%3DXwGd7nS2kmZ_znLd7MT1g%40mail.gmail.com >> [1]. >> Links: >> ------ >> [1] >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUik%3Du724L6JxAKi0gq-rPfV%3DXwGd7nS2kmZ_znLd7MT1g%40mail.gmail.com?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/bd53588153f2debae241dbb41e48b60a%40zonnet.nl. -- 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/FB25EE4D-6325-49D5-B85F-E862D9E9A2BD%40ulb.ac.be.
