David Nyman skrev:
> You're right, we must distinguish zombies. The kind I have in mind
> are the kind that Torgny proposes, where 'everything is the same' as
> for a human, except that 'there's nothing it is like' to be such a
> person. My key point is that this must become incoherent in the face
> of self-relativity. My reasoning is that a claim for the 'existence'
> of something like Torgny's B-Universe is implicitly a claim for
> self-relative existence: i.e. independent of other causality, like the
> One. When Torgny proposed the Game of Life as an example of 'another
> universe', I pointed out that GoL clearly doesn't possess independent
> existence: it's just a part of the A-Universe.
It is intresting to study the GoL-universe we can see on the Wikipedia
page. What will happen if we stop the program that shows this
GoL-universe? Will the GoL-universe stop to exist then?
No, the GoL-universe will not stop, it will continue for ever. The
rules for this GoL-universe makes it possible to compute all future
situations. It is this that is important. This GoL-universe is not
dependent of the A-Universe. What we see when we look at the Wikipedia
page is just a picture of a part of this GoL-universe.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at