Le 09-août-06, à 01:49, Colin Hales a écrit :

>
> Why is everyone talking about abstract computation? Of _course_ 1st 
> person
> is prime = Has primacy in description of the universe. Being a portion 
> of
> any structure (ME) trying to model the structure (the UNIVERSE) from 
> within
> it (ME as scientist inside/part of the universe) is intrinsically and
> innately presented with that which is _not_ the structure of ME (NOT 
> ME).
> This applies at all scales (eg ME = an atom, ME = a galaxy).
>
> An _abstract_ computation/model X implemented symbolically on a of a 
> portion
> of the structure (a COMPUTER) inside the structure (the UNIVERSE) will 
> see
> the universe as "NOT COMPUTER", not some function of the machinations 
> of X,
> the model. Eg The first person perspective of a register in a computer
> holding a quantity N must be that of being a register in a computer, 
> not
> that of 'being' a quantity N.
>
> The only computation going on around us is literally the universe. WE 
> are
> computations within it. We can only ever acquire data about it from the
> perspective of being in it.
>
> Maybe you're not talking about the same universe as me. We're trying 
> to get
> to grips with our universe, yes? I don't get it. Then again I seem not 
> to
> get a lot. :-)
>
> Colin hales


Of course I have a problem with the word "universe" and especially with 
the expression "being inside a universe". The reason is that I think 
comp forces us to accept we are supported by an infinity of 
computations and that the 1-(plural and singular) appearance of the 
universe emerges from that. cf UDA.

Bruno


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/


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