On 08 Jul 2011, at 03:39, B Soroud wrote:

Bruno, you are an animal...

True. According to Aristotle, I am a rational animal. What Aristotle did not see is that the more an animal is rational, the more it can become irrational and even self-destructing.

"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?

It is the substitution of a part of you by a machine. Like an artificial heart.

If I am not my brain, then what am I,

You are a person. Your body-brain run a program which actualize and reactualize your perception, belief, knowledge, observation, etc.

Comp will in fine need less than that, comp, thanks to the UD, needs only that this exists at some level, and for some arbitrary, but finite, size of the brain. But the neurophilosophy (the level for consciousness is the neuronal level) makes the reasoning more easy.

and how can i be projected or transferred into an artificial one?

By copying your brain/body/environment at the correct level (which I can show to be uncomputable! So you will have to make a bet with the doctor).

The usual analogy is that your mind is your software, and your brain is the main operating system. It is obviously Turing universal (once you know the definition and think a little bit), and the comp assumption is that it is not more than Turing universal.

What of "me" is transmitted to the artificial brain-body?

You bad souvenirs and your good souvenirs.
The obligation to pay taxes.
If the doctor was luckily right on the level, Your 1-you is transmitted in the artificial body. Your soul. Note that comp entails that if you have 100% survive, nobody will ever know that for sure, not even your 1-you. Your 1-you can know that he survived, but cannot know (only bet) that he has 100% survived.

Or in other words, what is this me that is exported to the artificial digital brain-body and continues to live through it?

It is a question of personal opinion. With comp, it is you. He has the right to vindicate your identity, and password.

It is obvious it gives you, in principle, many new powers, like travelling at the speed of light. But that could distract us from the *proof*, which does not rely on any technical feasability. It converges more toward an understanding that something has already been done, most plausibly. (Indeed, it will be was is done by just addition, and multiplication).

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?

The fact is that most natural phenomenon are computable. That might even be a problem for comp, which faces a priori to much uncomputable path (white noise, white rabbits).

What account for? it is the mechanist philosophy, or simply, that your brain is a (natural) organization of 100 billions of neurons doing sum on signal and responding in elementary rules temperate by the concentration of say, many, chemicals, together with 2000 billions of glial cells communicating with neurons and with themselves by their much more wave-like ways. A very complex machine, no doubt. The idea is that at some level, the causality is elementary computable, like in all field theories. The contrary would be an invisible mechanic changing the laws, or the use of infinite amount of information with sophisticated non computable distribution.

Plus, that artificial digital brain-body has to break down sometime....

It is the price of universality, you can crash. Worst, you have no way to prevent it.

can we really have technical immortality....

We cannot know that.
But we can understand that IF we can have technical immortality, THEN we are already immortal.
But who "we"?

we just keep exporting and exporting our "soul" (what?) to another brain-body whether digital-artificial or physical-artificial?

For economical reason, in the long run, we will live in virtual realities, still connected to an impressive technology making us aware of the galactic surroundings, and the other dimensions and directions. As universal being knowing that we are universal (Löbian) we have to be vigilant for not transforming ourselves into a mere neuron of a superior organism. We can remain universal, and participate to higher organism. This will leads to new fears (like when handling black holes, and other partners in this branch of reality.

"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?

By universal, in the comp context, I always mean Turing universal. It is the golem. It is a being (number, program, machine) which is such that if you give it a number (program, machine), it will behave like that number should. You computer is like that, except that tons of people have succeeded in putting many "applications" (good particular program) which hide a bit his universality. It is more easy with notation, but that is not for today.

A universal being? Or do you call the "universe" the universal machine?

Not at all. Do you know what is a programming language? Choose one, let us say COBOL, you order the programs by length and those having the same length by alphabetical order. You can code all functions from the number to the numbers (including necessarily those who will make the universal number crashes), so you can generate the list P_0, P_1, P_2, of all programs computing those computable functions from N to N, (and/or from N to crash).

n is universal if P_n(<x, y>) = P_x(y). Here ni is the universal number, P_n is the body (the computer), x is the program, and y is the data. The universal machine is the general purpose computer. It is mathematical notion, which is well "incarnated" in some physical machines since.

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

Its existence? yes, that is possible. The reasoning is independent from what you consider to be your body, or your memories.

 "That something else is arithmetical truth."

You mean quite literally or just figuratively?


It can be made precise by using a language, like first order logic, with a finite set of symbols. The non logical symbols can be just 0, s, +, *

You can read s(x) by the successor of x. So s(0) denote 1, and s(s(s(s(0)))) denotes 4.

The main axioms are
for all x, x + 0 = 0
For all x and y,  x + s(y) = s(x + y)
and similarly for mutiplication. And that is enough for the ontology (it is already Turing universal, and already define in its consequence the existence of a DU and its running.

One loop more, you get Self Aware little observers: the Löbian machine.

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

UDA is an argument that it is a consequence of mechanism.

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?

Hard question. Literally, you will survive in the most normal worlds close to this one. But jumps are possible, and amnesia can make you visit past.

"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.

The 1-you has no name, and only you know. The 3-you, might be more complex, but with comp, you accept it to truncate it at some level.
The DNA might already be a bet on the relative finite embodiment.

" 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.

The only purpose of this, is to illustrate the meaning of comp, so as to ease the undersatnding of the reasoning. It needs just to be valid, and the sc.fi. aspect of it is not relevant (except some likes that, and some hates that, but again, that is not relevant for the validity of the reasoning).

"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.

If comp is true, even without application, the consequences persists. If comp is true, then applied or not, physics is no more the fundamental science, but a branch of machine's theology (say). It might concern you (in case it is true) without applications. Then application of it can change what happens even for period without application. The technology of 400,000 might be enough developed to deduce your code by your impact on the past, and to "resurrect" you then. It might be than by convincing our descendant to proceed in the study of arithmetic and matrices, we augment our chance in surviving in more cool "closer realities".

"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?

Yes. I don't want to be rude, but that's the easy part. The problem is that it gives too much dreams, and if they don't glue well enough, then comp is refuted.

"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. "


" 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.

You don't need herculean ambition for that. You need only extreme humility in front of the task.

It is basically the natural right to doubt, and think.

The new science is the ancient science. By separating science from theology, you get a war between what looks like two theologies. By letting theology in science, you reintroduce the rigor in it, and its necessary humility and caution, and competing theories, and competing interpretation of theories.

It is a wrong conception of science to believe it has some given acquaintance with the truth. Making theology a science, would make it like "we know the truth". On the contrary, making theology a science means "OK, we know nothing", except now that by the Church-turing thesis we can study sort of ideal machine's theology. That is basically what did Cantor Gödel, Kleene, Löb, Solovay.

"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?

No it is a very specific sort of digital machine (number) which can emulate all the other machines, including the other universal machine.

It is universal in its ability to compute, or emulate. It is NEVER universal in its ability to believe/prove.

"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.

Again a confirmation you met a bad teacher. Why feeling guilty because of not understanding? Oh! Simple; because *not understanding* leads to bad notes, which leads to parents bad mood and anxiety. Ah! They fear you step into a black hole!

No. Feel guilty only of bad faith (if that happens), evidence deny (if that happens), and well, making my mail box exploding (that happens!).

Do you feel that computers were fated to exist?

Yes. Their existence is a theorem of elementary arithmetic.
If you believe in addition and multiplication, and a very small amount of logic, you believe or have to believe in the existence of computer.

I mean if you went back to classical greece... or classical india.... could it have been predicted or shown to deduced?

Excellent question. China was close. Reading the treatise "number" by Plotinus, and having a bit study Diophantus, I am not sure that in the world were Plato academia lasted longer they could have find it. Nature found it before (quantum vaccum, DNA, Brain, humans, Human thought, computers, ...). It is the little God. The one you can named (Like FORTRAN, Java, c++, LISP, game of life, etc.) but when you name it, its names multiplies.

"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 am serious, alas.
Here by heaven, I meant Platonia (the whole thing, which comp restricts to arithmetical truth). You might define Hell so large as to include heaven's typhoon, that would be a vocabulary point.

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

A rather common disease. And most mathematicians don't know really about logic and computer science.

"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".

It is arithmetical truth, seen from inside (from different perspective). It is beyond arithmetical truth. Far beyond. But that complexity is reflected in the arithmetical relations.

"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."

Party.... what kind of party?

All kind of party.
They have to be computable, or some slighting of the notion (there are Turing oracles) due to the indeterminacy.

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

Yeah, that will be the problem. You will have to encrypt your Gödel number (code, program, body description) if you don't want to get "invited" to party you don't want to go.

 "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...?

There is no end, but there are jumps. Things get complex, then a "phase transition" occur, or a change of perspective, and things are simple again, at another level, but then they complexifies up to the next transition.

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....

OK. You might find someone on the net.

"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.

You would love the universal machine, if you get familiar with it. It is vaccine against a vast class of reductionist thoughts. She can defeat all theories about them, but she can also be sleepy and imitates just the behavior of the universal machine next door.

"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?

The whereto is not part of the scientific discourse. I show, you dispose.

Acceoting some definition and platonic relation between Truth and Good, and between Truth and Beauty, and Protagorean virtue (that you cannot teach, except by your own example) there is a sort of ethic akin to harm reduction, and an understanding that world like asshole are good only in joke, but typically means only "I don't like you". Plotinus, like all platonist relate evil to matter. I am still trying to see if that translate into arithmetic too. I am nowhere. I still don't know if the physical universe is an invention of the devil (type Bf) to distract us from the real thing, or if the physical universe is on the contrary a serious hint (type Dt) on the real thing. The theology of machine is in its infancy, to say the least. Humans does not listen to humans, so it can take time for them listening to machines.

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....

I have none. I just can listen to the machine. To the music of numbers, and to the mess when they begin to look at themselves.


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?

I don't know.

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 don't know. In a sense that appears to. The UD generates an infinity of variants of that story. What counts is the relative measure of those stories.

" 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.

Nice. Matter is a bit the gap explanation of ... God! In Plotinus Matter is where God lose control. And the soul falls and then try to go back. God (truth) is a universal soul attractor.

"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....

Sorry but that proves nothing. I am not saying that such things does not exist, but that a personal experience proves nothing, even for you. The dream argument works for both for the moon and astral bodies.

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 need salvia, or sleep, for things like that.

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.

It is an experience, and it might be hard to interpret it, especially if we let theology in the hand of those who use argument by authority.

I have not the damned clue what kind of experience of are living, and if that repeat consult parapsychologists or psychiatrists. You might be lucky, also and experience part of yourself, or, who knows, some kind of alien. I am agnostic, but you will need a lot of data so that we can start theories. At least with salvia everyone (well many) can have a chat with the Virgin Mary (like the Mazatec called the femine presence reported by some salvia smokers).

"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?

I think there are a lot of misuse or abuse of science (especially QM and Gödel's theorem). Comp put some sort order there, but the surprise is that those misuse are often partially correct, just that they applied already to numbers. Hard to say.


"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?

No. The day I wake up and hope comp is true, I tend to believe only in the natural numbers, and some relations between them. It is more like universal dreamer, gigantic matrix, level of realities. There are gods, and there is a big unameable thing, from inside. There remains very big unknowns and Unknown.
I don't believe in Design, not in Designer.
But I believe that numbers dream. It follows from the comp assumption. They can dream about time and spaces.

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?

No. I can't really make sense of design and designer. The god here is literally "arithmetical truth" (but that is a secret, for us, and a sort of theorem for the machine, but we cannot know we are machine, that is the trick). It verifies some of the quality often attributed to God: it has no name from the machine perspective, and it makes intelligibility possible (by emulating the Löbian machine), but then there is a tension between proofs and truth, and the universal soul appears and fall (all this is a logical space, not in "time"). Then the soul generate matter and nature, but that's is not necessarily the will of truth. Good/Bad, True/false, Consistent/inconsistent appears to be inseparable and, well, the parties develop on the border. For the best and the worst.

p.s. by dreams do you mean ideas?

I mean pieces of computations.

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....

Of course. It is here and now which really counts.

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....

We will be more and more aware of it. Except for regular dark periods when the fear sellers get control. We can only fight for preventing this, by augmenting respect for education and research. We must invest on education, not in lies, like today (see the heath politics).

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.

We cannot know. But we can reason from assumptions.

"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.

Shakespeare got the blues, that day.
I wish you the best.



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 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to