On 2/28/2012 1:32 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 2/28/2012 7:43 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Dear Bruno,
Let me see if my thoughts are correct as I can best write them.
COMP is the conjunction of "Yes Doctor", the Church Thesis and
Arithmetic Realism, correct? I am now not sure of the definition of
"Digital physics" given this thread so far... From what I can tell,
Yes Doctor is built on the idea of functional substitutability at
some level or scale for physical systems, such that a given algorithm
will run on any functionally equivalent physical system; it is
basically a restatement of computational universality. This idea
shows us that our consciousness is not dependent on a particular form
of physical system if and only if our consciousness is algorithmic or
computable in the Turing sense. I am agnostic on this because I do
not see any evidence (pace Tegmark) that our brain's implementation
of consciousness does not involve quantum entanglement.
This is ambiguous. Tegmark showed that quantum decoherence of ion
locations in neural processes is much faster than neural signaling,
therefore brain processing is almost all classical. It is classical
*because* there is quantum entanglement between the ions and the
environment. It is quantum entanglement with an environment
(something with many degrees of freedom) that produces decoherence and
classical behavior. If you substitute for some neurons a silicon chip
that is designed to be functionally identical, that "functionally
identical" means it acts as a classical device to implement a certain
computational algorithm. Of course it will be quantum entangled with
its environment because that's what makes it classical.
Maybe you meant you that you think brain processes may involve quantum
coherent superpositions - but that's what Tegmark refuted.
Brent
--
Dear Brent,
Not so fast! Tegmark's argument only holds, if it can be
experimentally verified that is,_only_ for ion transport based
processes. Consider theexperimental evidence
<http://newscenter.lbl.gov/feature-stories/2010/05/10/untangling-quantum-entanglement/>
for quantum entanglement in the photosynthesis process in algea, does
that not make you pause just a little bit in making your proclamation?
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 [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
