On 8/2/2011 8:20 PM, Jason Resch wrote:



On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net <mailto:stephe...@charter.net>> wrote:


       No, my thought is that quantum coherence accounts for, among
    other things, the way that sense data is continuously integrated
    into a whole.  This leads to a situation that Daniel C. Dennett
    calls the "Cartesian Theater". Dennett's proof that it cannot
    exist because it generates infinite regress of homunculi inside
    humonculi is flawed because such infinities can only occur if each
    of the humonculi has access to sufficient computational resources
    to generate the rest of them. When we understand that computations
    require the utilization of resources and do not occur 'for free'
    we see that the entire case against situations that imply the
    possibility of infinite regress fails.
       Quantum phenomena is NOT all about randomness. Frankly I would
    really  like to understand how that rubbish of an idea still is
    held in seriously thinking people! There is not randomness in QM,
    there in only the physical inability to predict exactly when some
    quantum event will occur in advance. It is because QM system
    cannot be copied that makes it impossible to predict their
    behavior in advance, not because of some inherent randomness! Take
    the infamous radioactive atom in the Schrodinger Cat box. Is its
    decay strictly a "random" phenomena? Not really! QM says not one
    word about randomness, it only allows us to calculate the
    half-life of said atom and that calculation is as good as is
    possible given the fact that we cannot generate a simulation of
    that atom and its environment and all of the interactions thereof
    in a way that we can get predictions about its behavior in advance.



What is the distinction between random and unpredictable?


Unpredictable means that it cannot be predicted. Randomness is uncaused. A completely deterministic behavior can be unpredictable and not random. Consider the behaviour of a non-linear system.


        A consciousness can no more be copied than the state of a QM
        system.


    That's the point in question.  If Tegmark is right, it can.

       Tegmark is wrong.


Stephen, do you doubt that consciousness can be implemented by a digital machine or process?

I doubt that consciousness can be implemented in classical machines or their logical equivalents. Digital machines maybe, if they involve quantum entanglement of a certain kind.

Onward!

Stephen


Jason
--
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