Bruno Marchal wrote:
> Le 18-juil.-06, à 12:30, 1Z a écrit :
> >> Quentin Anciaux: Because if you were in a "simulation" and you have
> >> managed to get out of it,
> >> how can you know you have reach the bottom level of reality (ie: the
> >> material
> >> world then) ? How can you know the new real world you are now in is
> >> the real
> >> world and not another simulation ?
> >
> > 1Z: e.g it has some non-computable physics.
> But comp and platonism already predict some non computable physics. You
> said it yourself by pointing correctly that platonism leads to the
> apparent possibility of HP universe (Harry Potter Universe, or flying
> pigs, or random noise, ...).

Platonism obviously implies non-computability,
since non-computable functions mathematically exist.

However, the claim was that we are in a computer simulation.

A computer simulation is obviously computable.

>The mystery with "naive comp" is that it
> remains something apparently computable in our neighborhood.
> And that  "mystery" cannot be used as a straightforward refutation of
> comp, once we look at the non trivialities of computer science and of
> consistent self-referential discourses.
> If we bet on comp, then we can already bet we already live in a
> simulation, the natural one which emerges from the "creative nature" of
> the relations between numbers.

The word "emerge" is often used to hide magic.

What actually exists cannot emerge from mere truths.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to