Bruno Marchal wrote:
> 
> Le 19-févr.-07, à 20:14, Brent Meeker a écrit :
> 
>> Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>>
>>> Le 18-févr.-07, à 13:57, Mark Peaty a écrit :
>>>
>>>     My main problem with Comp is that it needs several unprovable
>>>     assumptions to be accepted. For example the Yes Doctor hypothesis,
>>>     wherein it is assumed that it must be possible to digitally 
>>> emulate
>>>     some or all of a person's body/brain function and the person will
>>>     not notice any difference. The Yes Doctor hypothesis is a 
>>> particular
>>>     case of the digital emulation hypothesis in which it is asserted
>>>     that, basically, ANYTHING can be digitally emulated if one had
>>>     enough computational resources available. As this seems to me to 
>>> be
>>>     almost a version of Comp [at least as far as I have got with 
>>> reading
>>>     Bruno's exposition] then from my simple minded perspective it 
>>> looks
>>>     rather like assuming the very thing that needs to be demonstrated.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I disagree. The main basic lesson from the UDA is that IF I am a 
>>> machine
>>> (whatever I am) then the universe (whatever the universe is) cannot 
>>> be a
>>> machine.
>>> Except if I am (literaly) the universe (which I assume to be false).
>>>
>>> If I survive classical teleportation, then the physical appearances
>>> emerge from a randomization of all my consistent continuations,
>> What characterizes a consistent continuation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a continuation in which I am unable to prove 0 = 1.  I can only 
> hope *that* exists.

OK, it means logical consistency relative to some initial axioms (which you 
take to be Peano's for the integers).  But I take it that there are many 
continuations which branch.  Is a continuation a consistent continuation up to 
the last branching vertex before 0=1 is proven - or do only infinite 
continuations count as consistent?  

I also wonder about basing this on Peano's axioms.  Would it matter if we took 
arithmetic mod some very large integer instead, i.e. finite arithmetic as done 
is real compters?  Wouldn't this ruin some of your diagonalizations?

Brent Meeker


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to