On Jan 12, 5:51 pm, "Stephen Paul King" <stephe...@charter.net> wrote:
> 1) What is the cardinality of this infinite collection/set/class/whatever of
> machines?

I believe that would have to be the cardinality of the continuum, but
I'm not entirely sure. Why does the cardinality matter?

> 2) What measure is it that might be used to partition the set or class of
> machines such that at least one subset of them can be identified as
> corresponding to consciousness?

I don't know. They may all correspond to some kind of conscious
experience. (What is it like to be a rock?) The ones that correspond
to human consciousness are the ones that do not terminate or repeat.

> 3)  How can we differentiate between Machines and not-Machines unless there
> exists some measure to do so?

You've lost me here. What not-Machines are you talking about?

> 4) How does mere existence of a Machine give any accounting for its
> implementation?

I don't understand the question.

> 5) Are you secretly attempting to construct a reductio ad absurdum proof?

Nope. I'm not secretly attempting to do anything. I am just trying to
understand the universe.

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Buda" <her...@acm.org>
> To: "Everything List" <everything-list@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:55 PM
> Subject: Re: the theory of everything
> snip
> But the abstract immaterial computations are all that there is. There
> is no machine, no physical universe, no nothing, without the
> computations - the consciousnesses. And all of them "happen", and all
> of them are equally real. Each of them is like the execution of a
> universal Turing machine given a particular input tape. The initial
> portion of the tape encodes some algorithm executed by the machine;
> the rest of the tape serves as input to the machine (observations, in
> the quantum mechanical sense).
> Some (infinite) subset of these machines correspond to consciousnesses
> that believe they are you. I am asserting that they, in fact, *are*
> you. The first-person you, including your mind, body, and the entire
> observable universe (as seen by you). That's why you can say "yes,
> Doctor" and still continue - your consciousness was never really in
> your body in the first place. Learning that as an infant was one of
> the first mistakes you made, and one of the hardest to unlearn, but it
> was necessary for you to be able to learn all the other stuff, the
> important stuff, most of which you have yet to learn.
> snip
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