On 14 Nov 2008, at 19:46, Brent Meeker wrote:
> That was my point. The SWE indicates that every microscopic event
> happens or doesn't happen stochastically splits the wave function.
> these events don't generally cause a split of Kory or other classical
This would contradict the linearity of the tensor product together
with the linearity of the evolution of the wave. I think.
> I don't see this. For a non-materialist it seems that an un-
> idea or program is an incoherent concept.
An un- implemented idea or algorithm makes sense. For example a
description of an algorithm A in natural language. Then an
implementation of A in the universal language U consists in a formal
string X such that if U is given X, UX, and run, the UX behaves like A
was supposed to define, except for the unexpected bugs.
"implementation" always means "implementation in some language", be it
immaterial combinators or "material" hardware.
With comp, the point is that "material hardware" needs itself to be
implemented in arithmetic, except here it is not so much a direct
implementation (unless Kory's, and Jason's mathematical physicalsim is
true) but more like an emergence from all computations (and thus on
all possible implementations of all computations in the universal
deployment). It is an open problem if the physics which emerge from
all computations can be itself capture by one computations. I doubt
it. If it exists, then it must have the shape of a sepical Universal
Dovetailer, like a quantum Universal Dovetailer (why not, but for me
this is very speculative).
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