# Re: bruno list

```
On 22 Jul 2011, at 20:52, meekerdb wrote:```
```
```
```On 7/22/2011 2:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
```
```
```
But what is a world? Also, assuming computationalism, you need only to believe that you interact with a "world/reality", whatever that is, like in dream. If not you *do* introduce some magic in both consciousness and world.
```

```
So I need to believe some magic or I have to introduce some magic. That seems a distinction without a difference.
```
With comp the only magic is 0, 1, 2, 3, + addition + multiplication.
```
```
```
But is that the *only* magic. It seems to me that your argument includes the magic of the UD. If I understand it, it says that if a UD is running it executes all possible programs. Among those programs are ones that are simulations of Everett's multiverse, such as we may inhabit, including the simulations of ourselves. Consciousness is some part of the information processing in those simulations of us; where the the same conscious state is realized in many different programs and so has many different continuations and predecessors.
```
But all this is a hypothetical depending on a UD.
```
```

```
The UD is a collection of number relations, and its existence is a theorem in elementary arithmetic. I did recall you this some hours ago, I think. There is nothing hypothetical in the existence of the UD. It is already part of the proofs in non LĂ¶bian universal machine. It is a computer scientist description of Sigma_1 truth. Even intuitionist have a UD.
```
```
The theory of everything is less demanding than the UD argument which presuppose you are conscious, and there is some consensual reality, with doctor and brains, for example.
```But the UDA should convince you that the TOE is just:

0 is different for s(x)
s(x) = s(y) -> x = y
x + 0 = x
x + s(y) = s(x + y)
x*0 = 0
x*s(y) = x * y + x

That's all. People who does not like number can take:
Kxy = x
Sxyz = xz(yz).

It is equivalent.

```
And aside from the problem that prima facie it will produce more chaotic non-lawlike experiences than law-like ones, there is no reason to suppose a UD exists. This explanation of the world is very much like Boltzmann's brain. It generates "everything" and then tries to pick out "this".
```

```
The UD exists independently of you like 777 is odd independently of you. Don't confuse the UD with the 'concrete UD' needs at step seven in the UDA. The universe does not need to "disappear" for having most consequences already available, and it does not need to be emulated at all by step 8.
```

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