Hi Bruno,
-Original Message-
From: Bruno Marchal
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2011 3:28 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 21 May 2011, at 19:15, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/21/2011 4:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
3-OMs are sequenced by
On 21 May 2011, at 19:15, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/21/2011 4:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
3-OMs are sequenced by the computations they "belongs" too. 1-OM
are structured by the topology on those computations derived from
the application of Theaetetus' theory of knowledge.
What topology is th
On 21 May 2011, at 19:13, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/21/2011 4:04 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 20 May 2011, at 19:44, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/20/2011 3:54 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2011, at 18:54, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/18/2011 9:21 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Brent,
Interesti
On 5/21/2011 4:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
3-OMs are sequenced by the computations they "belongs" too. 1-OM are
structured by the topology on those computations derived from the
application of Theaetetus' theory of knowledge.
What topology is that? What's the open set?
Brent
--
You receiv
On 5/21/2011 4:04 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 20 May 2011, at 19:44, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/20/2011 3:54 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2011, at 18:54, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/18/2011 9:21 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Brent,
Interesting! If we follow this idea, that memory is not
n
On 20 May 2011, at 22:44, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Brent and Bruno,
From: meekerdb
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2011 1:44 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 5/20/2011 3:54 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2011, at 18:54, meekerdb
On 20 May 2011, at 22:18, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/20/2011 3:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2011, at 19:47, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Rex,
A very good point! There must be a place for "false memories" in
our modal logics.
Indeed. and G* proves DBf. Lies and falsities abounds in t
On 20 May 2011, at 19:44, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/20/2011 3:54 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2011, at 18:54, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/18/2011 9:21 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Brent,
Interesting! If we follow this idea, that memory is not
necessary for consciousness, then conscio
Hi Brent and Bruno,
From: meekerdb
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2011 1:44 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 5/20/2011 3:54 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2011, at 18:54, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/18/2011 9:21 AM, Stephen Paul
On 5/20/2011 3:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2011, at 19:47, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Rex,
A very good point! There must be a place for "false memories" in
our modal logics.
Indeed. and G* proves DBf. Lies and falsities abounds in the mind of
the average Löbian machines.
An
On 5/20/2011 3:54 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 May 2011, at 18:54, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/18/2011 9:21 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Brent,
Interesting! If we follow this idea, that memory is not
necessary for consciousness, then consciousness does not require a
persistent structure t
proves BDt -> f. But this concerns the correct machine. All this work
because we cannot know that we are consistent.
Bruno
Onward!
Stephen
-Original Message- From: Rex Allen
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 1:30 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of
18, 2011 11:38 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 5/18/2011 7:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
That is how meditation and dissociative drug can help you to
remind the consciousness of the "blanche machine", the
consciousnes
r last question is
almost like asking to summarize the whole thing, which I do from times
to times, but I can't do without boring the reader. Take the time to
study the proofs and ask specific question.
best,
Bruno
Onward!
Stephen
-Original Message- From: Bruno March
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 07:50:57PM -0700, meekerdb wrote:
>
> Is this the psi of the universe or just of the observer (which
> observer)? How is it unit of experience?
It is closer to the "psi of the universe" concept than anything
else. Here, a "universe" means either a single observer moment,
On 5/19/2011 6:08 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:37:29AM +1000, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:41 AM, meekerdb wrote:
The important point for this argument is that we would have no way of
knowing if Last Tuesdayism is true, and this show
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:37:29AM +1000, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:41 AM, meekerdb wrote:
>
> >> The important point for this argument is that we would have no way of
> >> knowing if Last Tuesdayism is true, and this shows that the OM's can be
> >> sequenced implicit
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:41 AM, meekerdb wrote:
>> The important point for this argument is that we would have no way of
>> knowing if Last Tuesdayism is true, and this shows that the OM's can be
>> sequenced implicitly from their content.
>
> Only if their content is sufficiently comprehesive.
On 5/19/2011 4:45 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 1:35 AM, meekerdb wrote:
It may have started a nanosecond
ago, even though I remember starting to count up from zero and am now
at the number ten. That is, I am at the number ten but it may only be
the last part, the
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 1:35 AM, meekerdb wrote:
>> It may have started a nanosecond
>> ago, even though I remember starting to count up from zero and am now
>> at the number ten. That is, I am at the number ten but it may only be
>> the last part, the "n" of the ten that I have actually though
and ask ontological
questions. ;-)
Onward,
Stephen
From: meekerdb
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 3:17 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 5/18/2011 11:29 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Brent,
Oh you bet! Chopra and those like
On 5/18/2011 11:29 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Brent,
Oh you bet! Chopra and those like him have not done us any favors,
but can we truly begrudge people from making a buck of a book that is
a soft version of the ideas we are considering?
I can certainly begrudge a charlatan who charg
v.pdf
Brent
*From:* meekerdb <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>
*Sent:* Wednesday, May 18, 2011 2:00 PM
*To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>
*Subject:* Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 5/18/2011 10:44 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi
: meekerdb
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 2:01 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 5/18/2011 10:39 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Dear Bruno,
How beautifully said! This is a rediscovery of ideas that we find in many
mythological systems
Hi Brent,
I am happy to be wrong inn that opinion! But nevertheless finding a
physicists what will admit publicly what you mention is difficult.
Onward!
Stephen
From: meekerdb
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 2:00 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of
On 5/18/2011 10:30 AM, Rex Allen wrote:
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:38 AM, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/18/2011 7:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
That is how meditation and dissociative drug can help you to remind the
consciousness of the "blanche machine", the consciousness of the virgin
Löbian machin
*From:* Bruno Marchal <mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>
*Sent:* Wednesday, May 18, 2011 12:11 PM
*To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>
*Subject:* Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 18 May 2011, at 17:38, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/18/2011 7
On 5/18/2011 10:44 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Rex,
I agree with you 100%! I am amazed that this idea is considered as
a horrid heresy by most physicists
You seem to have an uninformed opinion of physicists. The physicists I
know don't consider anything "heresy" because they consider
May 18, 2011 1:30 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:38 AM, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/18/2011 7:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
That is how meditation and dissociative drug can help you to remind the
consciousness of th
Allen
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 1:24 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 1:40 PM, meekerdb wrote:
> On 5/16/2011 7:13 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
>>
>> [SPK]
>> I was trying to be
Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 18 May 2011, at 17:38, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/18/2011 7:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
That is how meditation and dissociative drug can help you to remind the
consciousness of the "blanche machine", the consciousness of the virgin Löbian
machine. Mem
implications, a sort of attempt at
a reductio ad absurdum.
Onward!
Stephen
From: meekerdb
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 12:54 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 5/18/2011 9:21 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Brent,
Interesting! If we
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:38 AM, meekerdb wrote:
> On 5/18/2011 7:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> That is how meditation and dissociative drug can help you to remind the
> consciousness of the "blanche machine", the consciousness of the virgin
> Löbian machine. Memories only differentiate conscio
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 1:40 PM, meekerdb wrote:
> On 5/16/2011 7:13 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
>>
>> [SPK]
>> I was trying to be sure that I took that involves the possibility that
>> the OMs are computationally disjoint into account. This covers your example,
>> I think...
>>
>> I am wonde
ng-list@googlegroups.com>
*Subject:* Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 5/18/2011 7:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
That is how meditation and dissociative drug can help you to remind
the consciousness of the "blanche machine", the consciousness of
the virgin Löbian machine. Memo
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 5/18/2011 7:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
That is how meditation and dissociative drug can help you to remind the
consciousness of the "blanche machine", the consciousness of the virgin Löbian
machine. Memories only dif
On 18 May 2011, at 17:38, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/18/2011 7:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
That is how meditation and dissociative drug can help you to
remind the consciousness of the "blanche machine", the
consciousness of the virgin Löbian machine. Memories only
differentiate consciousness.
borate on this.
Onward!
Stephen
-Original Message-
From: Bruno Marchal
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 10:58 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On 18 May 2011, at 02:46, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/17/2011 5:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
sn
On 5/18/2011 7:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
That is how meditation and dissociative drug can help you to remind
the consciousness of the "blanche machine", the consciousness of the
virgin Löbian machine. Memories only differentiate consciousness.
Are you claiming that every thought includes a m
On 5/18/2011 7:51 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 5:40 PM, meekerdb wrote:
The other theory that Stathis is explicating takes OM's to be atomic and
discrete. In that case they would have to be strung together by some
internal reference, one to another. I don't think
On 18 May 2011, at 02:46, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/17/2011 5:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 16 May 2011, at 19:40, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/16/2011 7:13 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
[SPK]
I was trying to be sure that I took that involves the
possibility that the OMs are computationally disjoint
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 5:40 PM, meekerdb wrote:
> The other theory that Stathis is explicating takes OM's to be atomic and
> discrete. In that case they would have to be strung together by some
> internal reference, one to another. I don't think that's a viable theory
> since in order to make t
On 5/17/2011 5:24 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 16 May 2011, at 19:40, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/16/2011 7:13 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
[SPK]
I was trying to be sure that I took that involves the possibility
that the OMs are computationally disjoint into account. This covers
your example, I t
On 16 May 2011, at 19:40, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/16/2011 7:13 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
[SPK]
I was trying to be sure that I took that involves the possibility
that the OMs are computationally disjoint into account. This covers
your example, I think...
I am wondering how they are "s
Dear Brent,
-Original Message-
From: meekerdb
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 1:40 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
> On 5/16/2011 7:13 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
> > [SPK]
> >I was trying to be sure t
On 5/16/2011 7:13 AM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
[SPK]
I was trying to be sure that I took that involves the possibility
that the OMs are computationally disjoint into account. This covers
your example, I think...
I am wondering how they are "strung together", to use the analogy
of putti
On 16 May 2011, at 16:13, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Hi Stathis,
-Original Message- From: Stathis Papaioannou
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 9:08 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Stephen Paul King
On 16 May 2011, at 15:08, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Stephen Paul King
wrote:
Hi Brent and Everything List Members,
Let me start over and focus on the sequencing of OMs. I argue
that the
Schrodinger Equation does not work to generate a sequencing of
O
Hi Stathis,
-Original Message-
From: Stathis Papaioannou
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 9:08 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Sequencing of Observer Moments
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Stephen Paul King
wrote:
Hi Brent and Everything List Members
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Stephen Paul King
wrote:
> Hi Brent and Everything List Members,
>
> Let me start over and focus on the sequencing of OMs. I argue that the
> Schrodinger Equation does not work to generate a sequencing of Observer
> moments for multiple interacting observers be
Hi Brent and Everything List Members,
Let me start over and focus on the sequencing of OMs. I argue that the
Schrodinger Equation does not work to generate a sequencing of Observer moments
for multiple interacting observers because it assumes a physically unreal
notion of time, the Newtonia
51 matches
Mail list logo