On 19/01/2009, at 9:58 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

> Le 18-janv.-09, à 11:32, Kim Jones a écrit :
>> On 18/01/2009, at 4:38 PM, Brent Meeker wrote:
>>>> I have no doubt that digital mechanism and materialism are
>>>> incompatible,
>>>> though.
>>> Is that because, under materialism, consciousness depends on causal
>>> links?
>>> Brent
>> supernatural causal links
> All right, if you define "supernatural causal links" by the "natural"
> relation existing among "natural" numbers (or other finite things).
> Assuming comp, of course.

But Brent was momentarily speaking of materialism - materialism  
doesn't acknowledge any form of comp "immateriality" except according  
to the (probably) false mind/body dualism, where the mind is allowed  
to be an ethereal emanation of the brain. But that's not even  
immateriality in your specific sense - that's popular superstition.  
You've cured me of that. Mind is computation; matter is computation -  
consciousness is not unique in the sense of some special pleading that  
allows it to avoid Turing emulability.

> That "natural supernatural" is really "super" in the sense that, as a
> machine or number, we cannot prove or known all the relations from
> which physics and nature emerge or supervene on.

Once comp is assumed this follows, yes.

> Kim, (and others) are you OK with the first person indeterminacy  
> issue?

I am happy to move on from this now. I cannot see how there can be a  
way of distinguishing any of my copies.

> Are you ok that, from a first person point of view, throwing a coin  
> and
> self-duplication are identical or isomorphic experience?

The two appear fundamentally the same process apart from the numbers  
of atoms involved

> And, do you agree that introducing delays does not change the
> expectations (the probabilities, or the credibilities) used for the
> first person indeterminacy?

Discussion over the last few days points has circled around this;  
personally, I now accept that "I" only exist when my conscious mind is  
up and running. During delays in teleportation my conscious mind  
cannot run on any hardware so I have no way of experiencing the delay.  
In fact the delay makes no difference to the outcome from my  

In step 6 every consistent extension is now virtual but this makes no  
difference to my belief that I am the same person I was before  
teleportation since I anticipate a consistent extension and that is  
what I experience. All that the experiment has to do is match my  
expectations with a consistently logical and convincing reality and I  
am prepared every time to say "This is real and this is happening to  
me" despite delays, annihilated originals, virtual renderings etc. As  
long as I am convinced by the environment I find myself in, I am  
prepared to bet that it is causally connected to the one (I  
experienced) before it - which I guess it would be even if it were an  
unconvincing low-res simulation.

> Take all you time, but if you can ask some question, it will help me  
> to
> prepare the answer. If UDA1..6 is well understood, meaning that there
> is no more question, I will try to imagine a way to explain step 7,  
> and
> this without getting in the mathematical details (if that is  
> possible).

This is the hard part! Still, I feel that I can intuit it. This is  
where you show how physics arises from number. Also how the Multiverse  
and MWI find their place in comp.

> I know that sometimes, things can seems so incomprehensible that  
> people
> cannot even ask any question.

Not incomprehensible - just counter-intuitive. It's a mind-boggling  
exercise and up to here I do not feel you are losing any explanatory  
power by cutting back on the maths.

> In that case, tell me know that it is too
> much incomprehensible, and it will be my duty to make things even more
> clearer .... until the "ah ah" (meaning "I understand or I have find  
> an
> error".
> Best,
> Bruno

- I did get a brief case of the "Ah Ah" (meaning I understand) when I  
read this article recently:

Our world may be a giant hologram - space - 15 January 2009 - New  

Surely the discovery of the graininess of spacetime adds weight to the  
physics/psychology reversal of comp?



You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to