Lee Corbin writes:
[quoting Bruno Marchal]
Why not choose D, that is I will see 0 on the wall OR I will see 1
on the wall.
Okay, now you have switched back to the prior (prediction)
level.
Here is the reason not to say that. As the person who is about
to be duplicated knows all the facts,
On Sun, Jul 10, 2005 at 11:49:53PM +1000, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
3) Combining General and Particular Architectures
Fusing information to combine apriori knowledge of general architecture
brain functions, and particular architecture data obtained from in situ
functional measurements
Stathis writes
But if you answer I will see 0 on the wall OR I will see 1 on the wall
then it makes it sound as though one of those cases will obtain but
not the other. (This is usually how we talk when Bruno admits, for
example, that tonight he either will watch TV *or* he will not
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Nevertheless, I still think it would be *extremely* difficult to emulate a
whole brain. Just about every physical parameter for each neuron would be
relevant, down to the atomic level. If any of these parameters are slightly
off, or if the mathematical model is
I agree with Jesse. Nature (if that exists) build on redundancies. (As
the UD). So if the substitution level is at the neural neurons,
``slight changes don't matter.
Of course we don't really know our substitution level. It is consistent
with comp the level is far lower. But then at that
Hi stathis,
Le Dimanche 10 Juillet 2005 13:22, Stathis Papaioannou a écrit :
Nevertheless, I still think
it would be *extremely* difficult to emulate a whole brain.
while I agree with you about the difficulty to emulate a brain that already
exists (such as emulate you or me for example), I
Again travel has forced me to take an absence from this list for a while,
but I think I will be home for several weeks so hopefully I will be able
to catch up at last.
One question I would ask with regard to the role of time is, is there
something about time (and perhaps causality) that goes over
Hal Finney writes
Can we imagine a universe like ours, which follows exactly the
same natural laws, but where time doesn't really exist (in some
sense), where there is no actual causality?
You yourself have already provided the key example in imagining
a two dimensional CA where the second
Hal Finney wrote:
So again, is it enough to look at the natural laws of our universe in
order to decide whether the consciousnesses within it are real? Or do we
need more? Can we imagine a universe like ours, which follows exactly the
same natural laws, but where time doesn't really exist
Jesse Mazer wrote:
[quoting Stathis Papaioannou]
Nevertheless, I still think it would be *extremely* difficult to emulate a
whole brain. Just about every physical parameter for each neuron would be
relevant, down to the atomic level. If any of these parameters are
slightly off, or if the
Quentin Anciaux writes:
Nevertheless, I still think
it would be *extremely* difficult to emulate a whole brain.
while I agree with you about the difficulty to emulate a brain that already
exists (such as emulate you or me for example), I don't think it is as such
difficult as to emulate a
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
It is likely that multiple error correction and negative
feedback systems are in place to ensure that small changes are not
chaotically amplified to cause gross mental changes after a few seconds,
On the other hand, the above may be precisely how consciousness
Bruno asked a while back for various people to try to encapsulate
their favorite theory or model of the everything exists concept,
so I will try to describe my current views here.
Basically it can be summed up very simply as: Universal Distribution
(UD) plus ASSA (absolute self selection
Dear Johnathan,
I find this idea to be very appealing! It seesm to imply that
consciousness per say has more to do with the attractor in state space
that any particular tableaux of neutron firings.
This, of course, would not fit well with the material eliminativists to
be forced to
I wasn't very clear in my last post. What I meant was this:
(a) A conscious program written in C is compiled on a computer. The C
instructions are converted into binary code, and when this code is run, the
program is self-aware.
(b) The same conscious program is written in some idiosyncratic
15 matches
Mail list logo
