Exercise: criticize the following papers mentioned below in the light of the discovery of the universal machine and its main consequences from incompleteness to first person indeterminacy. Think of the identity thesis. To be sure Tegmark is less "wrong" than Jannes.

## Advertising

Solution: search in the archive of this list where I have already explained this, or use directly UDA, or wait for what will (perhaps) follow. I should send some of my papers on arXiv, but up to now, only logicians understand the whole "trick", so I have to better appreciated what physicians don't understand in logic, before making a version free of references to mathematical logical baggage. Logicians are not interested in mind, nor really matter, and physicians are still naïve on the link consciousness/reality, I would say. To be sure Tegmark is closer than most physicists except perhaps Wheeler. Also, Tegmarks' argument for mathematicalism is invalid (even with strong non-comp axioms). But I prefer to help you to understand this by yourself through the understanding of what a universal machine is, than trying a direct argument. According of the part of UDA (or perhaps AUDA) you understand, you can already see the weakness of such direct mathematical approach. Note that comp makes physics much more fundamental, and separate it much clearly from possible geograpies. Above all comp does not eliminate the person, which Tegmark is still doing: the frog view is not yet a first person view, in the comp sense. Interesting stuff, still. Thanks for the references. Bruno On 20 Jul 2009, at 19:44, Brian Tenneson wrote: > I found a paper that might be of interest to those interested in > Tegmark's work. > > http://arxiv.org/abs/0904.0867 > > Abstract > I discuss some problems related to extreme mathematical realism, > focusing on a recently proposed "shut-up-and-calculate" approach to > physics (arXiv:0704.0646, arXiv:0709.4024). I offer arguments for a > moderate alternative, the essence of which lies in the acceptance > that mathematics is (at least in part) a human construction, and > discuss concrete consequences of this--at first sight purely > philosophical--difference in point of view. > > -Brian > > > 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-list@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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---