Hi Quentin:

While numbers may contain the ability to have a 
discourse about themselves such as via Godel 
numbering it seems to me a substantial leap to 
say that they can have any discourse about 
anything else let alone a discourse to a degree 
that brings these other things into some level of 
existence.  This is because as I see it meaning 
beyond the self reference to other numbers is 
assigned to numbers by mechanisms external to numbers.

How could numbers "mean" my list?  Since I could 
arbitrarily shuffle the list as often as I 
pleased then all counting numbers would wind up 
mapped to each item on the list.  This seems a 
complete suppression [except for the self 
reference just mentioned] of meaning => number 
and/or number => meaning to me.  Similar to what 
Peter said each number would mean "red", "green", 
"mammal", etc., and each meaning would be tagged to each number.

The simplest approach IMO is to allow that my 
list generates numbers as needed [and mathematics 
for that matter] in various universes and assigns 
numbers meaning in those universes as and if 
required via the dynamic generated by its various 
divisions [see my other posts on my model].

This does not preclude the generation of sets of 
universes - some out of an infinite number of 
sets of universes - in which numbers act as the 
seed and thus support Bruno's machine 
introspection etc.  The approach seems more 
universal in its scope of allowed universes and ease of their generation.

Hal Ruhl

At 12:24 PM 3/13/2006, you wrote:

>Hi,
>
>Le Lundi 13 Mars 2006 14:23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
> > Quentin Anciaux wrote:
> > > But whatever you do with numbers can be encoding with numbers, as such
> > > assuming platonic existence, numbers are the only requirements, because
> > > operation on them, discourse about them, description on them are numbers
> > > too.
> >
> > Hmm. You can hardly claim that the meaning is intrinsic to the number.
> > Does "2" mean "red", "mammal", "male" or what ? It could be mean
> > anything in a given coding scheme.
>
>I agree, but the coding scheme is also a number.
>The coding scheme is the instruction set of a turing machine, which is also a
>number... I'm stuck ;)
>
>Quentin
>


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to