all is number? but was there not all before number? numbers need their
objects. numbers must refer to something... the symbol must have its
substaces, even if that substaces is relatively indeterminate
independent of the symbol, or only visible via the symbol. Numbers are
a relationship between "thinker" and something else which encompasses
and differentiates from it. There is an interaction going on and
number is the intermediary.

It seems to me that you are trying to resurrect some possibility of a
theosophical mysticism.... which is predicated on immortality or it
has no substance at all, and immortality is further predicated on some
kind of Other World that is the sum of all positive attributes.

Not that I criticize your attempt, anything that complicates a simple
common sense realism I am in favor of.... but I don't see how reading
Platos Republic or Timeaus or Parmenides is gonna help us move
forward.... neither do I see how mathematics equals "what is" and only
equals what is..... neither do I see how Pythagorean Tektraktys or
"source of nature in eternal motion" or Indianism is gonna help us
move forward?

you seem to optimistic about spiritualistic possibilities.

It seems that you Bruno, are trying to covertly resurrect a kind of
Platonism

On May 29, 12:15 pm, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
> On 29 May 2011, at 20:22, selva kumar wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > 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?
>
> Yes. Assuming we are machine, elementary arithmetic is enough. And we  
> cannot justify this with less than arithmetic, making it a theory of  
> everything. The Pythagoreans were right, after all. They are redeemed  
> by Church thesis.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > 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...
>
> > 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 
> > athttp://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 
> > athttp://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
> > .
>
> 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.

Reply via email to