Re: MGA revisited paper

On Saturday, August 16, 2014 2:48:04 PM UTC+10, Pierz wrote: > > > > On Saturday, August 16, 2014 2:28:32 PM UTC+10, jessem wrote: >> >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 11:09 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 8/15/2014 5:30 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 1:27 AM, R

Re: MGA revisited paper

On Saturday, August 16, 2014 2:28:32 PM UTC+10, jessem wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 11:09 PM, meekerdb > wrote: > >> On 8/15/2014 5:30 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote: >> >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 1:27 AM, Russell Standish > > wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 09:41:00PM -0700, m

Re: MGA revisited paper

On Saturday, August 16, 2014 1:48:03 PM UTC+10, Brent wrote: > > On 8/15/2014 7:07 PM, Pierz wrote: > > Liz, I've been thinking about the best way to illustrate the core of the > MGA and Olympia arguments. Perhaps this will help. > > The Olympia idea is indeed a "baroque" construction as t

Re: MGA revisited paper

On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 11:09 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 8/15/2014 5:30 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 1:27 AM, Russell Standish > wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 09:41:00PM -0700, meekerdb wrote: >> > On 8/14/2014 8:32 PM, Russell Standish wrote: >> > >On Thu, Aug 14,

Re: [New post] Quantum Foundations of a Classical Universe

Sounds interesting. I wonder if there will be any new ideas on this topic. -- 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...@googleg

Re: Shalosh B. Ekhad: In Computers We Trust?

I guess we've picked all the low-hanging fruit in Platonia, or wherever this stuff lives. -- 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+unsu

Re: MGA revisited paper

On 8/15/2014 7:07 PM, Pierz wrote: Liz, I've been thinking about the best way to illustrate the core of the MGA and Olympia arguments. Perhaps this will help. The Olympia idea is indeed a "baroque" construction as the paper nicely puts it, but I suspect Maudlin was trying to illustrate what am

Re: MGA revisited paper

On 8/15/2014 5:30 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote: On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 1:27 AM, Russell Standish > wrote: On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 09:41:00PM -0700, meekerdb wrote: > On 8/14/2014 8:32 PM, Russell Standish wrote: > >On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 08:12:30PM -0700,

Re: MGA revisited paper

Liz, I've been thinking about the best way to illustrate the core of the MGA and Olympia arguments. Perhaps this will help. The Olympia idea is indeed a "baroque" construction as the paper nicely puts it, but I suspect Maudlin was trying to illustrate what amounts to a simple intuition, namely

Re: MGA revisited paper

On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 1:27 AM, Russell Standish wrote: > On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 09:41:00PM -0700, meekerdb wrote: > > On 8/14/2014 8:32 PM, Russell Standish wrote: > > >On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 08:12:30PM -0700, meekerdb wrote: > > >>That does seem strange, but I don't know that it strikes me a

Re: [foar] MGA revisited paper

On 8/15/2014 4:34 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Friday, August 15, 2014, LizR > wrote: On 15 August 2014 12:40, meekerdb wrote: If counterfactual correctness and causal environmental reference are not needed for consciousness then consciousness will be instantiated

[foar] MGA revisited paper

On Friday, August 15, 2014, LizR > wrote: > On 15 August 2014 12:40, meekerdb wrote: > >> If counterfactual correctness and causal environmental reference are >> not needed for consciousness then consciousness will be instantiated by any >> sequence of states, >> > > OK. From which I can only de

Re: MGA revisited paper

On 8/15/2014 11:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 14 Aug 2014, at 19:41, meekerdb wrote: On 8/14/2014 1:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 13 Aug 2014, at 21:47, meekerdb wrote: On 8/13/2014 7:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Does Bruno actually say what he thinks consciousness is? (This is probably

Re: MGA revisited paper

On 8/15/2014 10:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 14 Aug 2014, at 10:41, Russell Standish wrote: On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 10:25:40AM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: I agree with you in general, but I can agree a little bit with Liz too, as I find Brent slightly sneaky on this issue, but all in all B

Re: MGA revisited paper

On 8/15/2014 9:48 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 14 Aug 2014, at 10:34, Russell Standish wrote: On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 09:59:31AM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: A human being or any physical system reacts to the world in one way or another. What was asked was for was counterfactual correctness

Re: MGA revisited paper

On 14 Aug 2014, at 19:41, meekerdb wrote: On 8/14/2014 1:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 13 Aug 2014, at 21:47, meekerdb wrote: On 8/13/2014 7:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Does Bruno actually say what he thinks consciousness is? (This is probably somewhere beyond the MGA, which is where I t

Fwd: Electron spin and consciousness

Maybe there is a quantum aspect to consciousness. Brent Original Message Interesting finding regarding properties of ESR and how anesthesia works. While quantum, this is not in line with Penrose/Hameroff's theory. http://www.worldsciencefestival.com/2014/08/anesthesias-ele

Fwd: Shalosh B. Ekhad: In Computers We Trust?

FYI -- Brent Original Message http://www.simonsfoundation.org/quanta/20130222-in-computers-we-trust/ In Computers We Trust? As math grows ever more complex, will computers reign? By: Natalie Wolchover February 22, 2013 Shalosh B. Ekhad, the co-author of several papers in

Fwd: [New post] Quantum Foundations of a Classical Universe

Bruno should have been invited. Looks like some interesting papers. I hope they'll post videos. Brent Original Message WordPress.com Sean Carroll posted: "Greetings from sunny (for the moment) Yorktown Heights, NY, home of IBM's Watson Research Center. I'm behind on respe

Re: MGA revisited paper

On 14 Aug 2014, at 15:15, Pierz wrote: Liz did you ever get to grips with the counterfactuals business? In case not, the way I would summarize it is this. Consider a computer game in which you fly through some 3D landscape. The game is "intelligent" because it can respond to whatever you d

Re: MGA revisited paper

On 14 Aug 2014, at 10:41, Russell Standish wrote: On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 10:25:40AM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: I agree with you in general, but I can agree a little bit with Liz too, as I find Brent slightly sneaky on this issue, but all in all Brent is rather polite and seems sincere. Yet

Re: MGA revisited paper

On 14 Aug 2014, at 10:34, Russell Standish wrote: On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 09:59:31AM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: A human being or any physical system reacts to the world in one way or another. What was asked was for was counterfactual correctness, i.e. the the MG reacts the same as would t

Re: MGA revisited paper

On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > Le 15 août 2014 07:29, "Russell Standish" a écrit > : > > > > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 06:52:47AM +0200, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > Le 15 août 2014 06:41, "meekerdb" a écrit : > > > > > > > > OK. So do you think consciousness supe

Re: MGA revisited paper

Le 15 août 2014 07:29, "Russell Standish" a écrit : > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 06:52:47AM +0200, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > Le 15 août 2014 06:41, "meekerdb" a écrit : > > > > > > OK. So do you think consciousness supervenes on such a simple > > computation - one that's functionally identical w