Quentin Anciaux wrote:
----- Original Message -----
Subject: Re: a description of you + a description of billiard ball can
> > Hi,
> > Le Jeudi 19 Mai 2005 21:18, John M a écrit :
> > I think that is what Bruno explains (rather my understanding of it), > >
that "consciousness" (a thing ?) is emergent on all computations passing
through th(is/ese) state(s). If I understand, there is not one computation
that simulate a thing but a set of computation having this state.
> > But it seems to me that an infinity of computation passing through a
particular state exists, so I do not very well understand how a measure can
be associated to it.
IMO consciousness is not "a thing", maybe a set of functions(?) - if we ever
agree. Bruno remarked:
> Measure theory has been developed for taking into account infinite sets on
which the measure bears on.
that must be a good compromise between the wholistic and model views. I
still hesitate to exempt a 'measure' from its reductionistic status in spite
of the wholistic infinite set it is 'based on' - seemingly to be by
simulation, ie. model construction.
> > I'm not an expert too ;)
> Beware the experts. today, in the interdisciplinary fields, they are
> in average worst than honest inquiring lay(wo)men.
An 'expert' is a person "who knows all - better than others". As a technical
consultant I always preferred to be called "a specilaist".