Re: On Pre-existing Fields

```
On 14 Feb 2012, at 03:55, Stephen P. King wrote:
```

```

```
The idea of a measure that Bruno talks about is just another way of talking about this same kind of optimization problem without tipping his hand that it implicitly requires a computation to be performed to "find" it.
```
```
Because UDA+MGA shows that even if a "real" primary physical universe exists, it cannot explain anything related to what I can feel to observe from my 1p view. Obviously, the appearance of a universe makes it natural to believe that a simple explanation is that such a universe exists, but this has been shown to not work at all, once we assume we are Turing emulable. So f you are right, then there must be flaw in UDA+MGA, but each time we ask you to point where it is, you come up with philosophical reason to discard comp (without always saying it).
```

```
I do not blame him as this problem has been glossed over for hundred of years in math and thus we have to play with nonsense like the Axiom of Choice (or Zorn's Lemma) to "prove" that a solution exists, never-mind trying to actually find the solution. This so called 'proof" come at a very steep price, it allows for all kinds of paradox.
```
```
This is unclear. Comp is axiom-of-choice independent. Even arithmetical truth is entirely axiom of choice independent. ZF and ZF + AC proves exactly the same arithmetical truth.
```

```
A possible solution to this problem, proposed by many even back as far as Heraclitus, is to avoid the requirement of a solution at the beginning. Just let the universe compute its least action configuration as it evolves in time,
```
```
This does not work, unless you define the physical reality by arithmetic, but this would be confusing. It seems clearer and cleare that your "existence" axiom is the postulate that there is a physical primary reality. But then comp is wrong. At least Craig is coherent on this. he want some primitive matter, and he abandons comp. His theory is still unclear, but the overall shape make sense, despite it explains nothing (given that he assume also a primitive sense, and a primitive symmetry).
```
Bruno

```
but to accept this possibility we have to overturn many preciously held, but wrong, ideas and replace them with better ideas.
```
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 .
```
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