On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 06:12:35PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: > It is a good occasion to sum up the main differences and the main > similarities between Standish, Schmidhuber, Lewis, Tegmark, Levy, > Ruhl, Mitra, Mazer, Finney, ... and my own. All approach are indeed > form of modal realism, and this is indeed what the everything-list is > all about. >

## Advertising

Thanks Bruno - this is a useful summary > > Standish is not yet enough clear about its assumptions, but seems to > get a pretty derivation of schroedinger equation, which is an > improvement. He does assume time, with the topology of the reals, which > is my main critics. The 1-3 distinction is present and used in an > anthropic way, but I have not yet understood it precisely. TIME needs to be assumed for the White Rabbit solution, but not the topology of the reals. The latter assumption is _purely_ to make contact with the traditional formulation of the Schroedinger equation. What I sincerely suspect is that the real topology is the wrong one, and that the Schroedinger equation will need to be modified to take account of whatever topology time really has. I cannot see that TIME is a problematic assumption. In many systems - eg computationalism, TIME is a theorem, a consequence of other assumptions. More problematic is what precisely it means - hence discussions of topology etc. What I claim is that a computationalist model is possible of my theory. It would probably be useful to do this, as it might shed light on where my assumptions come from, and also probably forge a link between my work and Bruno Marchal's for example. I feel a little inadequate for the task - but perhaps with the eyes and brains of this group to correct me, it can be done. And you never know - I may be wrong on the possibility of a computationalist model, which would be a suprising result in itself. > > Actually I think it would be quite useful if, like we have done > "joining post", each of us could summarize its own approach in a > reasonably short post. The present post was just for showing you the > richness of the our hunting-dragon in the everything (modal) landscape. It probably requires a series of manifestos, which can then be prodded, poked and ripped apart, and then maybe melded by this list. We have manifestos already for Tegmark, Schmidhuber (actually 2 of these), Marchal, Malcolm and myself. Anyone else like to contribute? I'm not sure I really understand Hal Finney's position, for example. Give me a few more months, and I'll have a draft manuscript of my book ready for you to sharpen your intellectual knives on. -- *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely ignore this attachment. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile) Mathematics 0425 253119 (") UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australia http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

**
pgpmKoSqCJ5GH.pgp**

*Description:* PGP signature