On 2/13/2012 9:44 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:

On 2/13/2012 9:16 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote:RDR: Not sure if this is helpful, but a possible hypotheticalcommunications model is the 3D 10^90 per cc set Calabi-Yau CompactManifolds of string theory that are purported to control all physicalinteractions as they each contain the laws of physics; andcollectively they may manifest consciousness as well as perhapsPlatonia and "cyclic gossiping" as their variable properties acrossthe universe may manifest a Peano arithmetic. Regarding communicationeach spherical element/manifold instantly maps all the othermanifolds and all physical phenomena to its interior.http://vixra.org/abs/1101.0044## Advertising

--Hi Richard,I am highly skeptical of string theory because of its Landscapeproblem, the lack of observational evidence of super-partnerparticles, the fact that it is not back-ground independent and itsunderlying philosophical assumptions. All that aside, I will take alook at the referenced paper.Onward! Stephen

Hi Richard, I like your paper! I would like to point out something. You quoted [Chalmers(1995)]:

`(1) Assume my reasoning powers are captured by some formal system F (to`

`put this more briefly, "I am`

`F"). Consider the class of statements I can know to be true, given this`

`assumption.`

`(2) Given that I know that I am F, I know that F is sound (as I know`

`that I am sound). Indeed, I know that`

`the larger system F' is sound, where F' is F supplemented by the further`

`assumption "I am F".`

(Supplementing a sound system with a true statement yields a sound system.)

`(3) So I know that G(F') is true, where this is the Gödel sentence of`

`the system F'.`

(4) But F' could not see that G(F') is true (by Gödel's theorem).

`(5) By assumption, however, I am now effectively equivalent to F'. After`

`all, I am F supplemented by the`

knowledge that I am F.

`(6) This is a contradiction, so the initial assumption must be false,`

`and F must not have captured my`

powers of reasoning after all.

`(7) The conclusion generalizes: my reasoning powers cannot be captured`

`by any formal system.`

`This reminds me of problematic sentences in logic such as "Stephen`

`cannot know the truth value of this sentence". While I can only`

`inconsistently speculated on the truth value of that sentence, you, not`

`being Stephen, can consistently determine its truth value. I see this as`

`arguing that truth values are quantities that are strictly local and not`

`global.`

`Since I am a HUGE fan of Leibniz, I like the Monad-like quality`

`that you are considering with the concept of a CYCM, but wonder if the`

`particular geometric properties are being arbitrarily selected. It seems`

`to me that any monadic construction will do so long as it can support a`

`self-referential logic, such as Peano Arithmetic. Additionally, how do`

`we deal with the apparently bosonic property of minds given the very`

`fermionic property of matter. Could supersymmetry really be a theory of`

`the mind-body problem? Some people, like Matti Pitkanen,`

`<http://matpitka.blogspot.com/> think so and I sympathize with this`

`view. But it still seems to assume too much. Maybe this is just the`

`price of a theory. ;-)`

Onward! Stephen -- 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.