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
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
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" <email@example.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:55 PM
> Subject: Re: the theory of everything
> 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.
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