Bruno, you are an animal...

 "So that you can in principle survive with another body, coming from the
first by local functional substitution. I coin this into saying "yes doctor"
to a surgeon proposing you an artifical digital brain."

What is local functional substitution? If I am not my brain, then what am I,
and how can i be projected or transferred into an artificial one? What of
"me" is transmitted to the artificial brain-body? Or in other words, what is
this me that is exported to the artificial digital brain-body and continues
to live through it? If someone takes my brain out, and puts an artificial
digital one in.... you think that I will continue to express my
consciousness and will through it? That is pretty strange and weird... what
accounts for it? Plus, that artificial digital brain-body has to break down
sometime.... can we really have technical immortality.... we just keep
exporting and exporting our "soul" (what?) to another brain-body whether
digital-artificial or physical-artificial?

"The conclusion is an explanation how the laws of physics emerges in the
mind of the universal machine, or number (the digitality makes them analog
to numbers). This needs some amount of work to be familiar with."

Are you claiming that in addition to our particular machine-body that there
is somehow a universal machine-body? A universal being? Or do you call the
"universe" the universal machine? And if so, in what way is the universe
actually distinct from me? Am I not essentially "the universe"... am I not
an integral part of its e

 "That something else is arithmetical truth."

You mean quite literally or just figuratively?

"There is something compelling in Objective Idealism... but what does it
mean to me beyond just an interesting speculative idea...

>
> Well, no more once you accept the digital transplant."


What if I don't accept the digital transplant, what of all those who don't
and can't and haven't and won't?

"You can already understand that *you* are immaterial."

Yeah but saying I am immaterial doesn't exactly say or designate what I
am.... it only says what i am not. There is no identity statement, just a
dis-identification.


" You might be able to change your body every morning, or to travel through
the web, useful to go back and forth Earth and Mars."

Yeah but for what end? What is the value in this.... is there -feeling- and
-felt value- in this? It sounds childish... some point I might get over
it..... one needs purpose and meaning, real purpose and meaning.


 "But then the delicate point to show, is that such immateriality of you is
contagious on your environment, and testably so below your substitution
level."

I might die before all this happens, before all this goes anywhere, -if- all
this goes anywhere.

"I can't really doubt that 6 is even, and I need no more to explain why some
numbers develop stable believes in monstruous deep and complex histories."

Don't follow you..... the kind of pointless abstract fact that 6 is even
gives you all you need to explain why we have come up with some stupendous
conception of natural history or elaborate cosmogonic histories?

"It is the basic of theoretical computer science. I have often try to
explain a bit, but it is hard to give a course on mail. "

lol.

" Religion is the truth, and science is the tool."

That is optimistic... let us hope.... I suspect that science as we
understand it is not up to the task... some new science would have to be
conceived for such a herculean ambition.


>
> "but you might have to replace "we, the humans", by "we the universal
> machine".
>

Well I just realized today that to talk of "man" is overly presumptuous...
rather I should talk of "I"....  but like I said.... I am not so sure what
you mean by universal machine.... you mean: universe? or do you mean the
generalization of brain-intelligence?


>
> "Exactly. When you interpret "man" in the sense of the arithmetical
> interpretation of Plotinus (it is the (Löbian) machine)."
>

Lost you again. lol, makes me feel guilty.

Do you feel that computers were fated to exist? I mean if you went back to
classical greece... or classical india.... could it have been predicted or
shown to deduced?

"Mathematics is useful everywhere, even outside the universe."

outside the universe? you are very good at casually making extremely
controversial statements.... haha.

"After Gödel, we know that even in Heaven there are typhoons!"

eh? you making jokes again? Is this mathematician humor? haha.

I feel semi degenerate for not being initiated into the mathematics
mysteries


"It is just vaster than the physical universe. It is not so big from
> outside, but uncomputably big from inside."
>
> In truth, I don't know what you refer to when you talk of "it".


> "But your Platonia strikes me as empty.... it feels like a heartless world
> devoid of flesh and blood.
>
> From outside. But the party proceeds inside."
>

Projection?
Party.... what kind of party?
And don't start telling me we are gonna fly around the universe.... because
that is not my kind of party.


>
>  "We might think too much, or not enough.:
>

true, very true. There is nothing harder an rarer then good solid thinking.
Probably because there is no end to thinking...?



> From the feeling you give me, I think that you would have love math and
> computers, if they were appearing in some other way than in your school or
> youth.
> But if you like music, it is about the same, except for the applications.
>

I could potentially get into it, for me everything depends on
relationships... I wouldn't get into it just alone.... at least I
haven't....



> "Only, the phenomenal world is not all what is."
>
>> I don't follow you here. To me the phenomenal world is the main event, the
>> whole point. and I can't conceive of some other world...
>>
>
> yes, that might be your problem. And math is a tool for conceiving other
> worlds and realities.
>

Of course I can conceive of them.... Its just I don't take it that
seriously.... I have the feeling that if there is another world.... it would
have to be highly phenomenal..... I am into
plurality/diversity/multiplicity/motion/play...... I am into rainbow and not
light..... I am into heterogeneity and not homogeneity like Buddhists and
Plotinus. This world would have to be some other form or version of our
world... but maybe I lack imagination.... nevertheless, imagination is one
thing..... -living it- and -being their-  and realistic accessibility is
another.



> "Digital mechanism, like $any* theory cannot be proved, but my point is
> that it is experimentally testable."
>

I don't know about that.... but even if it is.... then what? If or when we
get the wherefrom.... we must say, okay, that is over, we are over
that....but then how about the whereto?

>
>
>
>
> It might be relevant when we die, or before birth. Things appears more
> complex than materialist want to believe.
>

Possibly..... yes.

>
> "We might have to teach math and physics to our descendants so that they
> will come back and save our souls, before the galaxy collide, but there
> might be shortcut and exit door already nearby."
>

Lol, I know me saying this is gonna irk you a little.... but you would
really make for an excellent science-fiction writer... seriously.... I am
not saying your work is science fiction! I am just saying you have an
incredible imagination....

anyways...

How do you know a more advanced race of more advanced beings hasn't already
accounted for all this and prepared for everything in advance?

How do you know a super-bruno from some prior galaxy isn't a 1000 steps
ahead of you and running the whole show?

" I am a super agnostic too. I don't believe in God, nor in Matter. And I
don't believe in their inexistence as well. But then I show that if we
assume comp, much light on those kind of things is given. It is free, and
not yet taxed."

That is pretty cool.

>
>
>>
> "That is not so incoherent for someone who find materialism 75%
> compelling."


Well today I did some deep thinking about materialism and I came to the
conclusion that it was a ridiculous notion. But I need to do some more
thinking of course.


> "I am open to the idea that we can discover new force, but spirituality is
> already some exploding just from the number relation, that I find it not
> necessary to hypothesize more than necessary."
>

I kind of feel it is not a hypothesis... in the sense that I feel or
experience some "astral force" or something.... it is pretty real to me some
of the times.... or atleast it seems that way.... it is a subtle
feeling/force and it even has visual components etc... I can see it around
me and stuff.... I don't know exactly what it is our what its causes are...
I just see/feel/sense it as some kind of subtle "force" or I don't know
what! But I guess from third-person communicative it is hypothesis.


"Me neither, literally. But it makes sense it term of the information you
can discover."

That makes sense....

"We can see that, but that's not all. That is why mediation technic ask for
some amount of calming down the thoughts."

If we apprehend some kind of phenomena or ecstatic feeling or luminosity or
sparks show or latent force made manifest or some totalizing transformation
or I don't know what.... the question still remains: "what really happened?"
or "how should I interpret this?" "what are the true causes" etc. ....
right?

yes, but many buddhist confuse the samadhi (total peaceful mind) and
> enlightenment ("big sudden shift or perspective").
>

lol, for "analytical meditation"... I don't go for any of those.... I just
try to have clearest and most concentrated and most thorough thinking I can
have.... that is the meditation..... or sometimes if I meditate I try to go
for high concentration for like greater inner power and ecstatic euphoria
empowerment.

Incidentally.... what is this so called "inner power" or "will".... or even
perhaps "mental force"... what does physics or science have to say about
that?
.

>
>> "That is the whole point of reasoning. To fit the pieces of the puzzle, we
> need something simple, but big. Arithmetical truth from inside is ¨very
> big*. This list is based in part of the work on Everett in Quantum
> Mechanics, which shows that if we read QM literally, there are infinities of
> parallel universes. I show that a priori, if we similarly take just
> arithmetic seriously and literally, there are many more dreams, and
> realities emerges from gluing property of dreams.  Reality is beyond
> fiction, always."
>

How did we end up in this mess in the first place? Do you believe in
Designer, do you believe in Design? Did we exist billions and trillions of
"years" ago? And if so, what were we doing? lol. (this question is loaded
like gun powder because so many scientists blow up are become very  anxious
over the question of design... because they think it is christian or perhaps
it goes beyond the reach and range of scientific verification so they
consider it insignificant and they are tired of getting nowhere with the
notion. And perhaps even if they were to entertain the notion, they would
hate the 'Demiurge' because it has created a seemingly absurd situation and
it is pretty Deist.... not sure all the psychology involved) what I am
saying is, if you presuppose some kind of spiritual meaning to the cosmos,
then it seems to me that you presuppose some kind of Demiurge.... because
how else would it become infused with spiritual meaning and import?

p.s. by dreams do you mean ideas?


Bruno........ I am 25 and I have like what, 60 more years optimistically
speaking?.... and you, you have 40 more years optimistically speaking? Even
if we had a hundred or hundreds more.... I doubt we would transcend our
present predicament.... I don't think the morrow will be much different from
today.... we probably will not liberate ourselves from our present plight of
radical ignorance.... and then..... cremated to smithereens or entombed six
feet under.... what will become of us, whence our fate? no one knows, or at
least not we.

"To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing."

good talk, take care.

>
>

-- 
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