Hi David,

I promise to give you more explanation on my work. Somehow I don't know 
really where to begin. I know I should not be to technical too (if not, 
Norman Samish will accuse me to make the reader leaving the list ;).

What I have done can be divided into two parts:

UDA  =   The Universal Dovetailer Argument  (= the seven first step of 
the current "eight steps" version).
AUDA  =  The Arithmetical Dovetailer Argument (alias the interview of 
the Lobian Machine)

In SANE I have collect them in one large 8th steps version called UDA, 
but I will come back to my Brussels-Lille version where I separate UDA 
from the Graph-Movie and/or AUDA.

I will use the following acronyms:

YD = "yes doctor" = the position of some computationalist practionners 
saying yes to his doctor's proposition of having an artificial digital 
brain substitution.

CT is Church Thesis. It is the thesis that all computers in Platonia 
(that is, here,  in any place with unbounded memory and space 
capacities) are equivalent with respect to the class of computable 
function from N to N. I will have to explain you why and how CT makes 
the notion of computability absolute, and the notion of provability 

AR = Arithmetical Realism = the doctrine that elementary arithmetical 
propositions are true or false independently of me, you, etc.

COMP = computationalism = YD + CT + AR.

UDA is an argument showing that COMP + "there exist a physical running 
UD" entails the reduction of physics to number theory/computer science.

So with OCCAM you can already eliminate the hypothesis that there is 
physical running UD, and thus that there is any need for a physical 

Now, given that this conclusion is admittedly startling, I have made 
things far more explicit in two ways, and that is the step 8 of the 
"UDA" in the last version of it.

The first way is the MGA, the Movie Graph Argument. It eliminates 
almost completely the use of OCCAM.
The second way is AUDA. To applied it on the natural world you still 
have to use the usual form of OCCAM in the natural science, but AUDA 
eliminates completely the use of "YES DOCTOR". The trick is to 
interview the universal machine, instead of interviewing *you* like in 
the UDA (seven steps).

Hmmm... So yes. I prefer to call UDA the seven first steps (unlike what 
I have done in my SANE paper).

Let us say that this post was just a refreshing of the acronyms. Is it 
OK up to here? Have you a good understanding of the seven first step of 
the SANE paper ?   Cf:



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