Hi Lee, To split a hair... ;-)

`----- Original Message -----`

`From: "Lee Corbin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>`

To: <everything-list@eskimo.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 9:47 PM Subject: The Time Deniers snip

I am still at the point where I cannot quite imagine how a huge nest of bit strings (say all the real numbers between 0 and 1) manages to (in stasis) emulate all possible conscious experiences of all possible entities. But I still have an open mind.

I don't have a problem with that statement given that "in principle":

`1) There is at least one Real number that is Identical to the bitstring (of`

`an algorithm) that IF implemented would render a simulation that is`

`Identical to some particular conscious experience.`

`2) All possible conscious experiences have a simulating/emulating/rendering`

`algorithm that is isomorphic to some Real number.`

`I do have a problem with the Time Deniers in that I find their`

`postulation that the mere ab initio existence of the Real Numbers, ala`

`Mathematical Platonism, is sufficient to necessitate the unassailable fact`

`(1st person for me - incorrigibility!) that I am having a conscious`

`experience of typing these words on my computer.`

`There is a huge difference in kind between "existing" and "emulating".`

`Existing is atemporal by definition since existence can not depend on any`

`other property. Emulations involve some notion of a process and such are`

`temporal. The idea that a process, of any kind, can "occur" requires some`

`measure of both transitivity and duration.`

`The mere *existence* of a process only speaks to its potential for`

`occurrence.`

Kindest regards,

`Stephen`