On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 11:53:01AM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> Le 06-juil.-05, ? 07:16, Russell Standish a ?crit :
> >My reading of Bruno's work is that time
> >is implicitly assumed as part of computationalism (I know Bruno
> >sometimes does not quite agree, but there you have it).
> Thinking again on why you keep saying this, I can imagine, giving the 
> inexhaustible richness of the combination of addition and 
> multiplication in Robinson or Peano Arithmetic(*), that a case can be 
> made that I assume time. But that "time" is neither "physical time" nor 
> "psychological time" which are derived from numbers' relations.
> So I am "just" a physicalness-deniers, by which I mean no "physical 
> things" are taken as primitive. Indeed I explain why comp makes the 
> physicalness emerge from numbers' relations.

I know this is a response to a rather stale post, but I'm still
thinking of these topics. I think the equivalent of my TIME postulate
in Bruno's case is interpreting Kripke semantics of his logic of
knowledge as phenomenally real. It is what "breathes the fire into the
equations". Kripke semantics by itself is mere interpretation, but to
say it is actually experienced must surely be an independent


*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

Attachment: pgpJnoFs3ef6X.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to