Information theory, computationalism and the science of Platonia
I am not a mathematician, so what I say here may be nonsense,
but can't we say something more scientific about Platonia and monads
than we have ? For example:
a) I think that the physics or science of Platonia must be
Hi Bruno Marchal
Thanks. Then the numbers are noit separate but
included in the truth. My feeling is that the truth
then may be the truth(s) of information theory.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
11/2/2012
Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen
- Receiving
Hi Bruno,
Could it not be that there is nothing especially sacred
about the natural numbers, that these are, as Hobbes
put it regarding words, but counterfeit tokens ?
And the real controlling force which uses them is
information theory ? That is to say, intelligence.
Roger Clough,
Hi Evgenii Rudnyi
Cool. But I am in the minority who believe that intelligence
is more basic than the natural numbers. Because it does things
with numbers. It governs them.
The ancient philosophers had no concept of information theory,
so it is not surprising then that they held numbers to
Hi Hal Ruhl
Those are objective features of life, but IMHO
a) life is subjective not objective.
b) life is intelligence itself.
c) intelligence governs an objective body.
d) intelligence is the ability to make choices on one's own,
without outside help or rules.
e) The above is
Hi Stephen P. King
The reason why I think of numbers as not being
primary to being is that they act as objects
in a sea of intelligence. It is the intelligence that
is primary because intelligence is subjective.
Intelligence operates on numbers. By themselves,
numbers can do nothing except
Hi Stephen P. King et al,
For what it's worth, in the philosophy of mathematics,
numbers are considered as static entities (they don't change).
Instead, change is a property of geometry. I suppose
because angles can change.
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
11/2/2012
Forever is a long
ROGER:
Hi Bruno Marchal
1) Yes, numbers float in a sea of universal mind (the One).
BRUNO: The ONE is much more than the universal mind, as it is where the
universal minds compete, perhaps before eventually recognizing
themselves and reuniting, or fusing, and coming back to the ONE
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote:
But you can't stay awake unless your hardware allows it.
So what? I can't shoot a gun unless the trigger works. Does that mean I'm
not shooting the gun by pulling the trigger?
You are external to the gun, but you
To borrow a couple of playing pieces from kant,
two basic , or the two basic, pieces of
pre-existence in spacetime are the intuitions
time and space. I think these are more
useful than numbers because things are
actually made of them.
Perhaps these are 0 (yin) and 1 (yang) or perhaps
they are
Any image can be written as a string of binary numbers
and similarly with sound. In mp4 we can have both image
and sound. Some of these sounds and images would be meaningful,
for example mozart's requiem as a video, or a nightly news
broadcast.
In principle any string of binary numbers can be
On Friday, November 2, 2012 8:18:29 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote:
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Craig Weinberg
whats...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
But you can't stay awake unless your hardware allows it.
So what? I can't shoot a gun unless the trigger works. Does that mean I'm
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
let's presume that in 999 out of 1,000 almost identical standard models
that exist in string theory, the half-life is 1 us. But in 1 out of those
1,000, the half life is 10 us. If you are the experimenter what can physics
On Friday, November 2, 2012 10:07:36 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Jason Resch jason...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
let's presume that in 999 out of 1,000 almost identical standard
models that exist in string theory, the half-life is 1 us. But in 1 out of
On 01 Nov 2012, at 19:13, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 01.11.2012 18:30 Bruno Marchal said the following:
On 01 Nov 2012, at 11:09, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
“Absolute Spirit is the fundamental reality. But in order to create
the world, the Absolute manifests itself, or goes out of itself
On 01 Nov 2012, at 21:21, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/1/2012 11:23 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
[SPK] Bruno would have us, in step 8 of UDA, to not assume a
concrete robust physical universe.
?
Reread step 8. Step 7 and step 8 are the only steps where I
explicitly do assume a primitive
On 01 Nov 2012, at 21:25, John Clark wrote:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
the you before the duplication or the you after the duplication?
All the you after, are the you before, by definition of comp.
OK, but the you before is not the you after.
On 01 Nov 2012, at 21:33, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/1/2012 11:36 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Nov 2012, at 00:35, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 10/31/2012 9:39 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
1) Yes, numbers float in a sea of universal mind (the One).
2) Here's a thought. If the universe acts
On 01 Nov 2012, at 21:42, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/1/2012 11:39 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Enumerate the programs computing functions fro N to N, (or the
equivalent notion according to your chosen system). let us call
those functions: phi_0, phi_1, phi_2, ... (the phi_i)
Let B be a
On 01 Nov 2012, at 22:34, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/1/2012 11:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Nov 2012, at 01:01, Stephen P. King wrote:
Dear Bruno,
Exactly what do these temporal concepts, such as explain,
solve, interacting and emulating, mean in an atemporal
setting? You
On 01 Nov 2012, at 22:50, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/1/2012 12:04 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Nov 2012, at 01:18, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 10/31/2012 12:45 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
can stop reading as you need to assume the numbers (or anything
Turing equivalent) to get them.
On 02 Nov 2012, at 10:34, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
Thanks. Then the numbers are noit separate but
included in the truth.
Losely speaking, OK. Numbers are objects, truth concerns only
propositions.
My feeling is that the truth
then may be the truth(s) of information theory.
On 02 Nov 2012, at 10:42, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno,
Could it not be that there is nothing especially sacred
about the natural numbers, that these are, as Hobbes
put it regarding words, but counterfeit tokens ?
Numbers, with + and * laws, is mainly the same things than digital
On 02 Nov 2012, at 11:50, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno Marchal
When I refer to the One, I think of it not as a number 1
but as a metaphor.
Well, the ONE is not the number 1. OK.
The Soul is the identity of a monad, including the
supreme monad. The soul does not change, even though
the
On 02 Nov 2012, at 16:07, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com
wrote:
let's presume that in 999 out of 1,000 almost identical standard
models that exist in string theory, the half-life is 1 us. But in 1
out of those 1,000, the half life is
On 11/2/2012 5:29 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Stephen P. King
stephe...@charter.net mailto:stephe...@charter.net wrote:
On 11/1/2012 12:23 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
Don't get me started on reductionism! I don't believe in it
On 11/2/2012 12:23 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Nov 2012, at 21:21, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/1/2012 11:23 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
[SPK] Bruno would have us, in step 8 of UDA, to not assume a
concrete robust physical universe.
?
Reread step 8. Step 7 and step 8 are the only steps
On 11/2/2012 12:23 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
How can anything emerge from something having non properties? Magic?
Dear Bruno,
Why do you consider magic as a potential answer to your question?
After thinking about your question while I was waiting to pick up my
daughter from school, it
On 11/2/2012 12:49 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Nov 2012, at 21:33, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/1/2012 11:36 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Nov 2012, at 00:35, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 10/31/2012 9:39 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
1) Yes, numbers float in a sea of universal mind (the One).
Hi Stephen:
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Stephen P. King
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 11:50 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Life: origin, purpose, and qualia spectrum
On
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
He believes he still exist, because he believes, or assumed, comp.
People believe they exist and in real life they don't have or need a reason
for doing so. And I no longer know what comp means.
Comp is that we can survive with a
On 11/2/2012 12:55 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Nov 2012, at 21:42, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/1/2012 11:39 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Enumerate the programs computing functions fro N to N, (or the
equivalent notion according to your chosen system). let us call
those functions: phi_0,
Dear Hal,
nice to read you again after all those years.
Life is a topic I brought up many times (as a question of course) and have
only a vague idea - opposing the conventional scientific stance based on
the carbon-etc. foundational bio/physiological restrictions.
In my *speculations* 'life' is
On Nov 2, 2012, at 4:02 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
He believes he still exist, because he believes, or assumed, comp.
People believe they exist and in real life they don't have or need a
reason for doing so. And
Bruno:
you got me.
I wrote about things we cannot know - we have no capability to think of it
- and you deny that based on products of the human mind (math - logic)
saying YES, we can know everything (that we or our products DO know).
You claimed to be agnostic (more than myself) - now I don't see
On 11/2/2012 1:08 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Nov 2012, at 22:34, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/1/2012 11:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Nov 2012, at 01:01, Stephen P. King wrote:
Dear Bruno,
Exactly what do these temporal concepts, such as explain,
solve, interacting and
On 11/2/2012 1:23 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
I can understand these symbols because there is at least a way to
physically implement them.
Those notion have nothing to do with physical implementation.
So your thinking about them is not a physical act?
Too much ambiguous. Even staying in
On 11/2/2012 1:23 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
bundles of arithmetic statements generate many individual observers
that in turn interact (which I model via a combination of cyclic
gossiping on graphs and bisimulations) with each other to define a
common physical world which in turn acts to
On 11/2/2012 1:23 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
You are the one saying that truth is limited to the means of knowing!!!
Yes and no, Truth is limited to the *possibility* of knowledge of
it. In the absence of the possibility of a statement being true (or
false), there is not such thing as true
On 11/2/2012 1:23 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Are you familiar with Jaakko Hintikka's ideas? I am using his concept
of game theoretic semantics to derive truth valuations.
I read this. yes. I don't see relevant at all.
I do appreciate his linking of intention and intension, but it is a
bit
On 11/2/2012 4:27 PM, Hal Ruhl wrote:
Let me refer you to a very old paper of mine:
http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/life.html
I took a quick look. I may need some help understanding it fully. I
occasionally play with the idea that Dark Energy is a spatially uniform leak
of
On 11/2/2012 4:27 PM, Hal Ruhl wrote:
[SPK] Do you see mutation as a one-to-many map and selection as a many
-to-one map?
Well the DNA strings we know of are finite [n characters] so a particular
example is a one in some sense and this string's finite number of
mutations 4 ^ n+ is a many.
Hi Stephen:
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Stephen P. King
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2012 6:37 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Life: origin, purpose, and qualia spectrum
On 11/2/2012
2012/11/2 Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net
On 11/2/2012 1:23 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
I can understand these symbols because there is at least a way to
physically implement them.
Those notion have nothing to do with physical implementation.
So your thinking about them is not a
On 11/2/2012 3:19 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/2/2012 12:49 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Nov 2012, at 21:33, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/1/2012 11:36 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Nov 2012, at 00:35, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 10/31/2012 9:39 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
1) Yes,
On 11/2/2012 8:25 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Either you can have emerging properties of nothing or you can't.
Either there is infinite regress or not, whatever is true (and one or
the other is), it's not an obstacle.
Hi Questin,
It depends on whether you think of Nothing as merely an
On 11/2/2012 10:48 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/2/2012 3:19 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/2/2012 12:49 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Nov 2012, at 21:33, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/1/2012 11:36 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 01 Nov 2012, at 00:35, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 10/31/2012
Hi Stephen:
I think this got lost so I sending it again.
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Stephen P. King
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2012 6:37 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Life:
On 11/2/2012 11:47 PM, Hal Ruhl wrote:
Hi Stephen:
I think this got lost so I sending it again.
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Stephen P. King
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2012 6:37 PM
To:
On 11/2/2012 10:38 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
No, that is an incoherent statement as it pretends to be meaningful in the absence of
any means to evaluate its meaningfulness.
So what means do you used to evaluate, Either snow is white or snow is not
white.?
My eyes can still
50 matches
Mail list logo
