From: Bruno Marchal
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 12:33 PM
Subject: Re: Is QTI false?
On 31 Mar 2011, at 15:35, Stephen Paul King wrote:
There seems to be a conflation of the ideas of the continuity of 1st
person Identity (over implementations/reincarnations) and Causality. Why
It is normal. Usually people take the comp hyp by assuming that
consciousness is related to a physical, or just a single implemented
computation, without taking into consideration the infinities of
computations leading to the same or equivalent states, as needed from
the first person perspective (plural or not). In fine the physical
computation is defined by the infinity of computations (executed by
the UD, or in arithmetic) leading to the equivalent state, and
physical causality emerges from all of them, leading to some
multiverse structure observable once we look at ourself below our comp
If this does not help, try to make your question more specific. It is
a difficult subject.
You like math, I think. I can define for you the 'arithmetical
physical causality': event A causes event B means that
BD(BD A -> BD B) is arithmetically true, with B and D being the new
box defined by the Bp & Dp translation in arithmetic.
Or something like that. Quantum logic (and also its arithmetical form)
has many notion of implication. The one above is the closer to the
Sazaki Hook which Hardegree used to show that orthomodularity in
quantum ortholattice is related to the notion of counterfactual. You
will find the reference in my papers.
Unfortunately orthomodularity is still an open problem in the
arithmetical 'quantum logic'. Eric Vandenbusche is currently trying to
optimize the G* theorem prover to get an answer.
I understand the role of the infinities of computations and the
equivalence as you are considering them finally, from reading your papers
over and over and a brilliant discussion of the concept of quantum
superposition in Andrew Soltau's book Interactive Destiny, but am still not
seeing the conflation of physical causality and logical entailment. For one
thing they point in opposite directions! I still don't understand how you
persist in not seeing the implications of the Stone duality! Oh well, that
is your choice, but putting that aside the continuity of 1st person should
supervene on the UD, no? It seems to me that from the point of view of the
UD there is no before or after or this causing that. To the UD everything is
simultaneously given. Additionally, the way that the dovetailing seems to
work makes it so that the UD is dense on the space of computations in the
same way that the Reals are dense in the continuum. But how can this be?
I am very interested in Eric Vandenbusche's work. I will see that Google
yields from him...
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at