Le 09-nov.-08, à 20:29, Brent Meeker a écrit :

>> You don't get the point. Mechanism is incompatible with naturalism. To
>> solve the mind body problem, keeping mechanism, the laws of physicist
>> have to be explained from computer science, even from the gap between
>> computer science and computer's computer science ...
>> Physics is the fixed point of universal machine self observation.
> That would be a very impressive result if you could prove it - and you 
> could
> prove that there is no other empirically equivalent model.

As I said, you don't get yet the whole point. UDA+MGA *is* the proof. 
You seem very near though.

I will come back on this and on your post and Kory's one,  once I am a 
little less busy. Probably the day after tomorrow.

But UDA (including MGA) is really presented (at least) as a definite 
proof that IF I am a digitalisable machine (whatever I am beside that) 
THEN there is no more choice in the matter: Physics is the fixed point 
of universal machine introspection, and any verifiable empîrical model 
which would contradict the unique comp-physics would give an empirical 
reason to believe that comp is false. This is what I try to say in the 
list since the beginning.

I am, for sure,  open to the idea that there is an error in the proof, 
but up to now, I have heard only of rumors (mainly made by some 
dogmatic materialist who seems never to have really studied the 

The proof is "easy", because it is non constructive. The interview with 
the lobian machine makes it constructive. This is more technical and 
actually it is not needed to get the proof. It is needed only to derive 
explicitly physics from comp. The logic Z1* gives already the logic of 
the observable propositions, and Z1*, that very special non classical 
logic,  is confirmed up to now by the empirical work (quantum physics).

Best regards,


PS I think I see the point that you are still missing. I will have to 
explain that whatever the physical universe is, in the case I am Turing 
emulable, the physical universe is NOT turing emulable. Up to now, the 
apparent emulability of Everett Universe, and its lack of first person 
rabbits does contradict comp. But again, this moves is shown 
technically weak once we take incompleteness seriously into account in 
the picture. This is also why it is hard for me not to mention the 
technical part. Without that part, I would have stop to assume comp 
since a long time!  I know that I am saying something terribly 
counter-intuitive, especially after 1500 years of Aristotelianism in 
the science of matter. We will come back on this asap.


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 

Reply via email to