2008/11/15 Michael Rosefield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Yeah, I think that was meat to be either short-sightedness, racketeering, or > just an attempt to push his own reality in a certain direction on the > character's part. > > For me, though, the thing about a stone implementing all possible > computations is that you end up with no possible way of knowing whether > you're in the 'stone reality' or some abstraction from it - you start off > with physicalism and end up with some kind of neoplatonism. Of course, you > could still argue that you need some kind of physical seed, but again what I > take from this is that since you can perform as much abstraction on the > substrate as you like, it doesn't matter how small it is - it can even be > completely nothing. My simplistic version works like this: > > 'Nothing' := 'Something' -> 'Everything'
Just what I was saying! -- Stathis Papaioannou --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
