On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:

> Hi selva,
>
>
> On 16 May 2011, at 16:49, selva wrote:
>
>  Considering only our world in the many world interpretation,it is a
>> separate causal domain..
>> there is no domain shear between the different domains(different
>> parallel worlds)..i.e.there is decoherence..
>> It is known that in our causal domain,there is cause and effect
>> relationships..
>> everything is happening because of a cause..everything is as it is
>> because it ought to be such.
>> There is a grand flow in the varying positions of atoms constituting
>> the universe..
>> If this is right,
>>
>
> This can't be right, if we assume that the brain (or whatever capable of
> sustaining consciousness) can be emulated by a Turing machine, as most
> people believe.
>
>
>
>
>
>  then how can we say ,we have free will ?
>>
>
> A determinist theory of free will is possible. What counts is that no
> machine can determine itself completely, so that the determinism of his/her
> behavior is known only by "God", not by the machine, nor by machine of
> equivalent complexity.
> Now, if you mean that free will is the capacity to disobey to arithmetic,
> then it does not exist, most probably.
>
>
>
>
>
>  why is there binary state at all ?
>>
>
> OK. You could have asked equivalently: why is there natural numbers?
> Logicians have shown last century that this is impossible to answer.
> Actually we need the natural numbers to ask "why natural numbers". They
> cannot be recover from any simpler theory. So we have to have some faith in
> them. It is part of the initial postulates.
>
>
>
>
>  if there is free will,how can we say everything affects everything ?
>> why is the 50-50 probability arises ?
>>
>
> Such a probability can be explained by self-duplication. If you are a
> machine, I can scan you (in principle) and duplicate you in two different
> places. You cannot predict in advance what will be your subjective
> experience after the duplication. BTW, this can be used to explain that
> free-will is not explainable by the use of indeterminacy.
>
>
>
>
>  why is there probability functions at all ?
>>
>
> Assuming we are digital machines, the answer is that the reality of
> realities is very huge. There is an infinity of computations going through
> your actual state of mind, and computer science explains why no machine can
> know which computations, nor even which sheaf of computations support it.
> There is automatically a statistics for the observable.
>
>
>
>
>  If the positions of the atoms in my mind(my thoughts) now affect the
>> positions of the atoms in your brain(your thoughts) ,then does it mean
>> you don't have a free will ?
>>
>
> Why? On the contrary. To have free will you must have some ability to make
> change around you. You certainly need some amount of determinacy.
>
> can i argue that the my ability to make change around me arises from the
> changes around me..
>
you are now thinking what you are thinking only because i asked you
this....that is,with your so called ability i am changing some thing,and
that changed things gives you the ability to change things around you..so
going backwards..(events are affected only by the past occurences in the
cone).wont we come to a single cause?

>
>
>  Is our consciousness part of the grand consciousness (the universe).
>>
>
> If by universe you mean "physical universe", it is not clear if that exist.
> Strictly speaking it is an open problem. With mechanism we can say that
> there are many dreams, and we can say that some dreams glue well together to
> form shared dreams. But it is not known if they glue so well as to define a
> singular physical universe, or even just a singular physical multiverse.
> Extremely hard question.
>
>
>
>
>  Are we like the white cells(individually conscious) in our body,to the
>> universe..?
>>
>
> You might be naive about "we", "body" and "universe". No problem, it is a
> tradition since theology has been abandon to politics 1500 years ago, in
> Occident. (Closure of Plato Academy in Athena, about 525 after JC).
>
>
>
>  Then above all,the real question is why is there parallel worlds at
>> all ?
>>
>
> If you accept the idea that your brain can be simulated at some correct
> level of substitution (so that you would survive a digital brain
> substitution), then the additive and multiplicative structure of numbers
> defines a vast "block mindscape", containing many dreams (as seen from
> inside). Some dreams glue and generate sharable (among collectivities of
> "universal numbers) deep histories, which are seen as universe appearance
> from their points views. The physical realm does not disappear, but is
> secondary to the "numbers dreams". The physical realm is still fundamental,
> but it is epistemological, not ontological.
> You might read the shortest paper(*) I wrote to sum up the consequences of
> taking seriously the *assumption* that we are Turing emulable. We discussed
> it a lot. Some have not yet seen the point, I'm afraid. I sum up it
> provocatively sometimes by saying that if we are rational machine, then we
> have to abandon the theology of Aristotle (atheism christianism etc.) for
> the theology of Plato (objective idealism, Pythagorism, some budhist and
> indian school or thought). In the first one there is an emphasis on the
> 'creation'. In the second one the creation is a sign of something else
> (actually arithmetic).
> (*)
> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/publications/SANE2004MARCHALAbstract.html
>
>
>
>  everything affects everything or not ?
>>
>
> In which sense? In our local physical realm even a big supernova explosion
> far away, cannot affect you here and now.
> In the arithmetical realm every truth is connected, but perhaps in a more
> trivial sense. They are infinities of intermediate modalities.
>
> Take it easy. We are in deep water. Ask any question.
>
> 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-list@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.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@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.

Reply via email to