Le 23-févr.-06, à 12:05, Kim Jones a écrit :


can a Loebian machine dream?

Yes sure. This is so true that I find easier to say that loebian machine can *only* dream. Then "realities" (including physical realities) emerges, or should emerge, from some point of view of the machines, from some class of dreams which can be glued in some coherent way, and which should correspond to some "many-histories" notion. And those "many histories" should obey some logic which should be compared to the empirical logic.

Recall the key formula (Godel's second incompleteness theorem): ~Bf -> DBf. "If I am consistent then it is consistent that I am not consistent". "Bf", the provability of the false, is of the type "I am erroneous" or "I am dead", or "I am dreaming", etc. Any sound machine cannot be sure she is awake, and ultimately, "to be awake" is only a serendipitously matter. Of course a description which is done at a propositional logical level is bound up to be somehow rough.

Does it dream the truth of Plotinus' Everything or falsity like you and me?

Those things are related. Naming incautiously the Everything can lead us, and the lobian entity, toward falsity. I need to say more on the hypostases to proceed. In particular I should make clear the relation between the hypostases and the observer-moments. I will do a post once I got the time to do it properly.


Reply via email to