On Wednesday 21 March 2007 17:46:32 Brent Meeker wrote:
> John M wrote:
> > Stathis and Brent:
> >
> > ineresting and hard-to-object sentiments.
> > Would it not make sense to write instead of
> > "we are" (thing-wise) -
> > the term less static, rather process-wise:
> > "We do"  (in whatever action)?
> >
> > John M
> That's part of what I'm struggling with.  ISTM that OMs, being static, may
> leave out something essential to consciousness.  But this conflicts with
> the idea of simulations in which all process rates are encoded statically
> as state values.  I think however this misses the point that a simulation
> must be *run* and that when it is run the computer provides the "rate",
> i.e. the clock.
> Brent Meeker

But the internal states of a computation are not tied to an "external" clock. 
The "external" clock rate is irrelevant (from the inside).

Quentin Anciaux

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