On 15 Nov 2011, at 20:36, spudboy...@aol.com wrote:

Outside of QTI, does anyone consider any hypothesis as 'viable' for "immortality"? I am not sure that I mean, never dying, I think I mean, some kind of continuation, beyond our current 'mortality" ? I am not meaning Uploading while still alive, or brain in a vat; but basically, an afterlife of some kind?

As I said recently, if you assume that the brain works like a (natural and material) machine, then you are confronted with many form of immortality.



I ask, realizing, that cosmology and consciousness, do not, by necessity, dovetail (UDA?).

I don't understand the meaning of that sentence. "Dovetailing" is just a technic for one program to generate and execute all programs (in all possible programming languages or universal systems). Such a program and its execution is part of the arithmetical reality, so that if you believe that "17 is prime" is true independently of you, you have to believe in an infinity of your continuations, whatever happens to you in any branches of the arithmetical reality, so you cannot avoid immortality (independently of any physical theory). More difficult is the question of what type of immortality is more probable, for example with or without amnesia, with or without a ladder of intermediate realities between "earth" and "heaven". But all such question are mathematical question, (assuming mechanism!) and no answer to such question are trivial. Strictly speaking we cannot answer them, because we cannot know for sure what is our mechanist substitution level. Intuitively, if the level is high, there are shortcut to "heaven" (the consciousness state of the virgin UM), and if the level is low, there might be a complex arithmetical "bardo thodol" with infinite sequence of lives. Some form of "intermediate after life" might depend on our ability today to convince our descendent to keep and remember and retrieve past data so that we might be reconstituted in the future. Other type of immortality, with (partial amnesia and universal reminiscence) are already available today, through meditation technic (hard and painful), or through that most amazing plant Salvia divinorum. In that case you can know you are immortal, because eternity becomes a sort of past experience, as paradoxical it might look at first sight.

Bruno




Thanks for your patience, everyone.

Mitch


-----Original Message-----
From: Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be>
To: everything-list <everything-list@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Tue, Nov 15, 2011 9:21 am
Subject: Re: The consciousness singularity


On 14 Nov 2011, at 18:39, benjayk wrote:

>
> I have a few more ideas to add, considering how this singularity
> might work
> in practice.
>
> I think that actually consciousness does not start in a linear
> fashion in
> our coherent material world, but creates an infinity of semi- coherent > beginngs all the time (at all levels of consciousness), which might be
> termed "virtual experiences", that exist right now. These are
> experiences
> are more akin to exploring the possibility space than having a
> consistent
> world (though they have to have a relative consistency, no one wants
> to
> experience random noise). This would explain the encounters with
> intelligent
> entities encountered on drug trips (sometimes dreams and
> meditation), that
> seem very conscious. It seems hard to explain where they could come
> from in
> coventional terms (future, spririt world, parallel universes,
> etc...?).

Why not mind subroutine? Living in Platonia, and manifesting through
brain's module?
This is already the case if mechanism is correct.



> My
> theory is that they are virtual beings, that really experience, but
> in them
> consciousness has not yet decided by which "real" entitiy (like a
> human) it
> is experienced, in which way the real subjective future will be
> experienced
> (there already might exist a virtual future, though), when it is
> experienced
> in reality and how exactly the experience is reflected to outside
> observers.

The thema of this list is that virtual or possible = real. Real =
virtual seen from inside.

You are reintroducing a suspect reality selection principle, similar
to the "wave collapse".

Bruno




> They are somehow left in abeyance.
> In the future, and partially already in the present, we might
> download these
> experiences and interface them with our normal history. With
> download, I
> mean experience them, and giving them a context, so they can become
> actual
> in a manner that makes sense in our reality. This can happen in our
> imagination, in our dreams, through playing games, reading books,
> surfing
> the internet and on trips.
> As we download the experience, we may infuse it with our
> personality/humaness (this often felt as merging with entities on
> trips),
> which leads to more consistent development in the virtual realm (so
> that
> entities can exist that are stable enough to make a clear and
> consistent
> communication possible).
> On the other hand, by downloading experiences, we can infuse our
> realm with
> creative new ideas (and the possibility of paranormal events), bring
> these
> virtual realm on earth.
>
> If we learn to navigate this virtual realm more efficiently in the
> future,
> it might be immensly powerful. For example, it allows the interaction
> between physically seperated entities.
> Or it may allow us to make time jumps (of course not collectively,
> since
> someone has to be there to make the time that we skip). That would
> allow for
> truly awesomely fast subjective development. Imagine you live your
> life, and
> at some point a virtual entities contacts you to die and jump
> 1000000 years
> into the future (where you get an appropiate body and mind for that
> future,
> of course). Right now we can't jump, because we need everyone on
> earth to
> make the world in normal time work. But if we learn to virtualize
> ourselves
> (/navigate the virtual realm) we may, instead of going to the world
> ourselves, send "copies" for some time (that are "played" by other
> ones) and
> in that way prolong the time until we have to come to earth (or
> whatever
> exists then) again.
>
> benjayk
> --
> View this message in context: 
http://old.nabble.com/The-consciousness-singularity-tp32803353p32842071.html
> Sent from the Everything List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> --
> 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

> .
>

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 .


--
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 .

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