Le 31-mars-06, à 16:52, 1Z a écrit :

> Such a theory at least does not predict what is not observed. MM
> over-predicts (white rabbits, Harry Potter) and under-explains (time,
> consciousness).

Read my old or recent papers before judging. Genrally the first part 
shows that comp makes physics a branch of computer science, alias 
number theory, and gives a nice and unexpected reason (based on a 
theorem by Lob) why quanta and qualia behaves differently, and obeys 
different but related logics.
The second part shows that comp is already testable, and gives already 
evidence that the Harry Potter situation are of measure zero (although 
works remains to be sure).

And read perhaps the literature on the mind body problem: all 
materialist approaches has failed, and then the result I got  explains 
what it should be so.

Actually you could perhaps explain how do you think a machine is able 
to distinguish a material (physical) reality from an immaterial 
(arithmetical) reality. Without saying it is an intrinsical property of 
the universe to makes machine aware (or you should explain this too, 
and that would be equivalent with finding an error or an unsufficiently 
motivated step in the UDA).



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 

Reply via email to