Kim, Russell

I appreciate your concern and propositions. I have a friend who thinks  
about making a book with a subsubsection only (in french), and I think  
that you could make hundreds of books from "Conscience et Mécanisme".  
And I believe this could give money to the publishers, and the  
translators and even the author, and even leads to movie and t-shirts!  
Everything I say follows from the idea, which can or cannot be in  
fashion, of self-duplication. I make this clearer in the "The secret  
of the Amoeba" (the book ordered by the Grasset french publisher).  
Self and self-duplication is a perennial thought object with a strong  
appeal to the art. Have you read Borgess?

Also, mechanism is today the most believed idea, but few are aware of  
the startling consequences, and of the non triviality and generality  
of the notion of "universal machine/number/system/...".

And my work can also be seen just as enthusiasm in front of the  
universal machine mathematical world.


Well I am afraid I have to die for this being true. For sad and boring  
circumstantial circumstances.


And then Mirek is right too and I should write a book (and a paper),  
instead.


But , and this is part of a problem, I have progressed, and I have  
progressed on the obviously most delicate point at the heart of  
computationalism (alas), the fundamental difference it introduced into  
public provability (about numbers,  machines and machine's discourses)  
and truth about those things.
And the fact that universal machine can observe that difference, and  
can actually *live* that difference.
It is the theological part. It is already in "Conscience and  
Mécanisme", with the chapter "theology and modality". But there I  
almost define "theology" by "modal logic" following a sort of  
tradition. The many modal logics have been conceived to help reasoning  
on fundamental metaphysical and theological issues, and nowadays  
computer science enlarge that sets of theories.
The progress is in the arithmetical interpretation of Plotinus. The  
Gödel provability predicates illustrates the appearance of a purely  
mathematical modality, but the "yes doctor" hypothesis/act of faith  
justifies, for each machines an "abstract" mathematical theology,  
which has 8 "natural hypostases", with 3 of them justifying or  
describing the comp physics (making that theology testable), quanta  
and qualia being distinguished by the Gödel inherited splitting  
between the modalities.
A toy theology with a complete cosmogony and theogony It is weird. And  
to be sure, the white rabbit problem has not been solved, only  
translated into a purely mathematical problem.

Anyway I am a bit stuck. Both by boring contingent difficulties and  
interesting necessary difficulties. Explaining the consequences of  
comp in this list, like currently, could augment (or diminish) the  
probability that I write the book, or perhaps I could write the book  
on-line, so that when more than five or ten people acknowledge a  
chapter is clear enough I go to the next chapter,  I dunno.


Anyway many thanks for the interest, and please, you have my  
permission to translate.  I can make links to those translations if I  
don't find them not correct, but then we can discuss (thanks for  
crediting). You can be part of the second possible volume of "the  
secret of the amoeba", the story of the thesis, asked by Grasset and  
the journal LE MONDE in 1998.

But I expect before some understanding and acknowledgment of  
understanding or of not understanding. I like the idea to explain to  
Kim, because it means starting from zero for the math and computer  
science part, this could provides possible technical annexes for the  
book making wider the audience.

Kim, to be frank I am not sure you can translate something without  
understanding it, but I am sure you can understand the main part of  
it, at least up to the point of trusting results in some books without  
going in the details. Interdisciplinary research asks for being  
professionally unprofessional, to smell the level of pertinence and  
develop a sensibility to the 1004 fallacies, which can grow at the  
frontiers of the fields.

When I say, you can, I admittedly make abstraction of time, things are  
not easy,

Of course when I see the argument for making illegal salvia divinorum  
I feel a bit depressed about humans and believe it is about time  
people learn elementary logic. There is a sort of pseudo "human  
science" which want to defend irrationalism, in the name of liberty,  
and which is very useful for arbitrary manipulation of facts and then  
lifes.

We should certainly not prosecute someone for making an arithmetical,  
or a statistical, or a logical error, given that learning needs  
errors. But sometimes I think we should be able to prosecute those who  
makes the *same* error again, and again, and again, and again, ...  
(generally to rise fear about something or someone or somepeople).


Best regards,

Bruno





On 31 Jan 2009, at 03:20, Kim Jones wrote:

>
>
> On 31/01/2009, at 3:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>>>
>>> I've also tried to dig through both Bruno's thesis with the help of
>>> google translator. It works for a while but soon one hits a wall
>>> with a
>>> difficult sentence/paragraph which is hard to understand even if it
>>> stands as the author inteded - and extra hard to understand if its
>>> meaning is corrupted by the translation.
>>>
>>> Bruno, I'd love to read your thesis in english, but I fully
>>> understand
>>> how hard it must be to get a good translation that you would be  
>>> happy
>>> with. At the end, it might be easier to start from scratch, take the
>>> essential from both thesis, update a little bit and write a book in
>>> english on your own directly. Is that an option for you?
>>
>
> Bruno reads beautifully in French.
>
> I have offered to translate some of his stuff - the Brussels thesis is
> a wonderful read in French, I can't really understand the stuff about
> the construction of the computer because I have no background in
> computer science, but I can translate all the text into good,
> idiomatic English if I could generate some little income in the
> process. He has said "The road to hell is paved with the best of
> intentions" to me in the past, and I agree with him on that, also that
> publishing deals will benefit the publisher, not the author, but there
> are many people (me included) who love his stuff now and wish it could
> be presented to a wider audience.
>
> Failing that, a few of you might have to learn French, which would
> benefit your brain cells anyway. French is just English pronounced
> wrongly anyway ;-)
>
> K
>
> >

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/




--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to