Hi Stathis, Hi Quentin, Hi All,

Le 14-juil.-06, à 01:48, Stathis Papaioannou a écrit :

<x-tad-bigger>  </x-tad-bigger>
<x-tad-bigger> I think I can follow Bruno's UDA up to the point of the point where he shows that comp => no material world exists. You seem to understand it and you aren't Bruno (at least, I assume you're not Bruno: none of us on this list can really be sure of these things, can we? ;). Would you be kind enough to explain it to me?</x-tad-bigger>
<x-tad-bigger>  </x-tad-bigger>
<x-tad-bigger> Stathis</x-tad-bigger>


In what sense is this message an offlist post? Is it just an "oops" phenomenon?
Now I am curious: you say you understand UDA up to "comp => no material world exists". Well that's a reasonable part of it. Does it means that you don't see the last thing, i.e. that physics should emerge from some 1-measure on the computational histories?
I still do not know if you have done the thought experiment where we execute a "concrete" UD in our apparent observable history/universe.


Did you succeed in explaining that to Stathis? Do you see it? Clearly, vaguely?


And the eighth step? Do we need to run the UD?
For some, arithmetical realism is enough for justifying that we don't have to run the UD.
But I don't think so. This would be (trivially, obviously) true if we were assuming at the start AR+, the pythagorean version of comp, which ontologically accept arithmetical truth *and no more*. But I don't do that, even if I think comp leads to it. To prove it, you still need
-either a form of Occam Razor together with an evaluation of the resemblance of the already extracted qualitative feature of the comp physics(*), with the empirical physics;
-or a direct argument showing that comp prevent consciousness to supervene on "physical activity", i.e. an argument à la "movie-graph" or Maudlin Olympia.


either intuitive, like the resemblances:
(QM many-1-interfering worlds, comp many-1-interfering computations);
(quantum "immortality", comp "immortality),
or mathematical through the arithmetical hypostases (G, G*, G1, G1*, S4Grz, S4Grz1, Z, Z*, Z1, Z1*, X, X1, X*, X1*).
The pretty mathematical result I got is that for the sensible and intelligible plotinian "matter" hypostases, the one with both "1" and "*" (+ S4Grz1= S4Grz1*) in their names, provide a form of arithmetical quantum quantization (through the modal "LASE" formula "p -> BDp") making the comparison mathematically sense-full.


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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