On 05 Jan 2010, at 21:18, Nick Prince wrote:

## Advertising

It feels a bit lie a chicken and egg situation - do we pick out the laws or do they pick us?. But I am still working my way through this and and loads of other stuff, so I don't understand it yet.

`The computable laws (definable in elementary arithmetic) pick "us",`

`and "we" pick the physical law.`

"Number => consciousness => matter."

`But this makes sense only if you mean by "us", "us, the universal`

`machines".`

It is pretty ridiculous, if you meant it by "us" the "humans".

`It is tricky to understand. Comp *is* counterintuitive. It is related`

`to a gap between the fist and third person point of view, which came`

`from the gap between 'true' and 'provable', (and 'true and provable',`

`etc.).`

`The possibility of this "reversal" comes from "programming", or "Gödel`

`numbering". It comes from the fact that a part of the mathematical`

`reasoning can be translated into arithmetic, and so does the`

`computations.`

`Auda comes from the fact, already well seen by Gödel in 1931, that`

`machines, or axiomatizable set of beliefs (theorie), can prove their`

`own Gödel's incompleteness result (the so called "formalized" second`

`incompleteness theorem). (~Bf -> ~B ~Bf).`

`Good book: Boolos 1979. (assume Mendelson's book or alike). No need`

`for uda, although it helps to "de-trivialize" uda, it makes the mind`

`body problem a problem in pure math/computer science.`

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.