On 21 Dec 2009, at 08:57, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > 2009/12/21 Nick P <m...@dtech.fsnet.co.uk> > Bruno states in his paper “The Origin of Physical Laws and Sensations” > that “The description encoded at Brussels after the reading-cutting > process is just the description of a state of some Turing machine, > given that we assume comp. So its description can be duplicated, and > the experiencer can be reconstituted simultaneously at two different > places, for example Washington and Moscow”. > > However to get this Turing state from the human, I suspect that this > might result in the destruction of the original – I am not sure just a > passive reading is possible. Bruno gives the footnote below. > > “For an example, it could be the state of a Turing machine emulating > some unitary transformation in case the > brain, whatever it is, is correctly described by quantum mechanics. > This recall that quantum computer does not > violate Church thesis, and comp, in its all classical and Platonist > form, is not incompatible with the thesis that the > brain is a quantum computer (which I doubt). Giving that machine > Turing state, it can be recopied, without > violating the non cloning theorem of quantum information science”. > > The unitary transformation alluded to above would need an initial > state to operate on in order to enable evolution. This initial state > must be obtained from a possibly destructive “read” to obtain > configurational data at below the substitution level, I’m not sure > that the no clone theorem can be overcome here? > > > You're anticipating "how this could be done on humans". But the > argument is done by taking for granted that "we"/consciousness can > be captured by a computational process (is turing emulable). So > let's take as a start a conscious being already running on something > else as "wetware" with input/output system that permits easy access > to the current computational state. > > The fact that we would be "turing emulable" does not entails that it > is actually possible to copy our current state without destructing > the wetware or that it is feasible at all... but if it is possible > (even at the expense of destructing the "original") then after that > data gathering, unlimited duplication can be done... so the fact > that the "original" would have been destroyed in the copying process > doesn't matter.

## Advertising

That's right. Another way to see this consists in reminding one that a quantum computer can be emulated by a classical digital computer. So, despite we cannot clone arbitrary (unknown) quantum states, we can actually "prepare" them (in the quantum sense of "preparation") in many exemplars, and, (and this is the point), the universal dovetailer generate those "preparations" infinitely often. The universal dovetailer, although typically classical and digital, does generate all rational possible quantum states. Now, if you attach your consciousness a real (or complex, with all decimals) quantum state, then we may be non quantum "preparable", but in that case we are no more Turing emulable, and it means that we are working in another theory than comp. (But you don't need quantum mechanics here, if we are analog classical machine using all the decimals of the reals involved, we are no more digitalizable machine either). Actually comp predicts already a non cloning phenomenon for any piece of observable matter, given that observation (of matter) emerges from an infinity of infinite computations (a priori), and that is not ( priori) digitally emulable. Bruno 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.