On 23 Feb 2012, at 15:12, marty684 wrote:

## Advertising

From: Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, February 23, 2012 4:48:10 AM Subject: Re: The free will function On 22 Feb 2012, at 18:17, marty684 wrote:Bruno, If everything is made of numbers (as in COMP)Nothing is "made of". Everything appears in the mind of Universalnumbers relatively to universal numbers, with hopefully reasonablerelative statistics.Think about a dream. If you dream that you drink coffee, you canunderstand that such a "coffee" is not made of anything. Theexperience of coffee is due to some computation in your brain. Withthe big picture apparently implied by comp, even the brain is likethat dreamed coffee: it is not made of anything. It is only locallymade of things due to the infinitely many computations generatingyour actual state.The "matrix" metaphore, or the Galouye "simulacron" metaphore is notso bad.And we don't need more than the numbers + addition andmultiplication to get an initial dreaming immaterial machinery.Thanks for this vivid clarification. But...Read UDA. You might understand that if we are machine (numbersrelative to other numbers), then we cannot knowwhich machine weare, nor which computations supports us, among an infinity of them.Everything observablebecomes probabilistic. The probability bearson the infinitely many computations going through your actual state(that's why they are relative).Why should probability depend on us; on what we 'know or cannotknow' ? On what is 'observable' to us? It seems to me that you aredefining probability by that which is relative to our 'actualstates'. Why can't we inhabit a seeminglyprobablistic part of aninfinite, determined universe ?

`But that is the case. If you define the reality by a tiny part of`

`arithmetic (equivalent with the UD), you have a deterministic`

`structure, which from our points of view will look indeterministic.`

`The probability are relative to us, because we are the one doing the`

`experience. Suppose you decide to throw a coin. To predict what will`

`happen to you you have to look at all the computation accessing the`

`computational state you have when throwing the coin, and infer what`

`will happen from a measure on the continuations.`

(If you've been over this before, please refer me to therelevant posts, thanks.) marty a.Read UDA, and ask question for each step, in case of problem, so wemight single out the precise point where you don't succeed to graspwhy comp put probabilities, or credibilities, uncertainties, infront of everything. UDA1-7 is enough to get this. UDA-8 is neededonly for the more subtle immateriality point implied bycomputationalism.My attempts to read UDA were never successful. Sorry.

`May be you have a problem with my english. Please, begin by the step`

`one, on page 4 of sane04, read it, and tell me precisely what you`

`don't understand in the step 1. I might need to re-explain comp to`

`you, or you can glance its definition on page 2.`

`When you will grasp step 1, we will be able to go to the 2th step, and`

`so one.`

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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.