Bruno: Behind in this group. I think that if you had a this Universe and replace the particles with its antiparticles.there should be no difference from the human observer POV. Ronald
On Dec 20, 4:51 am, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote: > On 19 Dec 2010, at 18:29, ronaldheld wrote: > > > Jason > > I would think normally the implant should work as well. Being > > Bajorean, could the missing essence be the influence of the Prophets? > > Data and the EMH should be able to pass the Turing test. > > Maybe I am missing something. A matter human in a matter universe > > should function the same as an antimatter human in an antimatter > > universe, AFAIK > > How do you know that? > > Of course it is a consequence of comp + the level is enough high to > allow electron to to be substituted by positron, etc. But if comp is > false, then you need an explicit hypothesis of invariance for the > matter/antimatter change. > And from a logical point of view, we can make a comp theory of mind > with the matter/antimatter change no more working (using string > theory, for example). > > Comp, or digital mechanism assumes that there is a substitution level, > not that we can know what is that level. Indeed, it can be shown that > if we are machine, then we cannot know which machine we are, but can > infer it with some degree of plausibility from the observable reality. > Saying "yes" to the doctor asks for a leap of faith. Of course we have > biological reasons/observations to assume that the level is probably > much higher than the internal working of particles and strings. > > Bruno > > > > > > > Ronald > > > On Dec 18, 12:57 pm, Jason Resch <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Ronald, > > >> I remember that episode. I thought it was quite a departure from the > >> atheistic slant that was usual to star trek. > >> ( For those not familiar with the > >> scene:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihdI8U9eS4c#t > >> =2m30s) > > >> They seemed to suggest in the episode that the operation failed not > >> because > >> of a defect in the artificial brain but because there was something > >> more to > >> the mind that the machine didn't capture, some soul or some essence > >> that > >> couldn't be copied. This is contrary to the frequent use of > >> transporters > >> throughout the series, unless you accept something like biological > >> naturalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_naturalism), > >> the idea > >> that only biochemistry has the right stuff or can do the right > >> things to > >> create consciousness. I don't think the writers of that episode > >> were well > >> versed in philosophy of mind, so I wouldn't put too much stock in > >> the ideas > >> they promote. For that episode to make sense you either have to > >> accept > >> dualism or biological naturalism (which is almost like a form of > >> dualism). > > >> Do you think that Commander Data, whose entire brain is positronic, > >> lacks > >> consciousness? I like the argument Picard gave for Data's > >> sentience:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWNPeNEvMN4 > > >> You mentioned that you had no problem with the idea of a person > >> made from > >> anti-matter particles. What if scientists invented tiny machines > >> that were > >> not atoms but operated all the same, would you accept that you > >> could build a > >> person using these? Taking the idea slightly further, lets say > >> these little > >> faux-atoms were expensive, so scientists decided to model the > >> machines in a > >> computer rather than make them. Simulating a small number of them > >> together > >> they could predict how nano-machines behaved. If the scientists > >> modeled a > >> much larger collection of these atoms, organized in the same way as > >> in a > >> person, do you think any of the complexity is lost? > > >> Jason > > >> On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 8:05 AM, ronaldheld <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >>> Bruno and Jason > >>> The complexity issue concerns me, perhaps because of the Deep > >>> space > >>> 9 episode:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ > >>> Life_Support_(Star_Trek:_Deep_Space_Nine) > >>> Ronald > > >>> On Dec 16, 11:39 am, Jason Resch <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 7:57 AM, ronaldheld <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>>>> Jason: > >>>>> I do not think a neutron take more trhan a finite amount of > >>>>> voltage > >>>>> to be able to fire. I do wonder if merely replacing the bio > >>>>> parts by > >>>>> processing hardware, do you lose the part of the complexity of the > >>>>> mind? Np problem with an antimatter man and mind. > > >>>> If the mechanical replacements have the same repertoire and > >>>> behavior as > >>> the > >>>> biological parts I don't see how the complexity would be > >>>> lessened. Many > >>>> people feel lessened to be thought of as a machine, but they > >>>> probably > >>> don't > >>>> fully appreciate just how complex of a machine the brain is. It > >>>> has 100 > >>>> billion neurons (about 1 for each stars in this galaxy) and close > >>>> to 1 > >>>> quintillion connections or 1,000,000,000,000,000 (about 1 > >>>> connection for > >>>> every cent of US debt). People aren't familiar with man-made > >>>> machines > >>>> anywhere near this level of complexity and so it is > >>>> understandable that > >>> one > >>>> could doubt a machine acting like a human. However, I think this is > >>> mainly a > >>>> prejudice instilled by the types of (comparatively simple) > >>>> machines we > >>> deal > >>>> with on a daily basis. > > >>>> Jason > > >>> -- > >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > >>> Groups > >>> "Everything List" group. > >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > >>> . > >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >>> [email protected]<everything-list > >>> %2Bunsubscribe@ googlegroups.com> > >>> . > >>> For more options, visit this group at > >>>http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.-Hide quoted > >>> text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups "Everything List" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected] > > . > > For more options, visit this group > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en > > . > > http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
