On 12 May 2012, at 22:51, John Mikes wrote:
Pure non-consciousness?
that would approach the 'pure(?) nothingness' - even in my
generalized definition of Ccness:
"response to relations" leaving open he definition of a response and
of relations. Otherwise it is perfect.
But 'response to relations' miss the qualia aspect of consciousness.
RESPONSE came in as a concoction from "acknowledgement of and
response to" since you cannot respond without acknowledging to WHAT
you reflect.
RELATION came in from the visualized (infinite) complexity of which
we also are part and lots of so far unknown eements are included
that MAY influence our 'world' (the model). All 'information' (hard
to specify!) ends up in relations as it 'refers' to complexity-
aspects.
That is a bit unclear for me.
Sorry for using so many unfamiliar words.
That might explain why.
Bruno M
John M
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 8:09 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 10 May 2012, at 21:09, John Mikes wrote:
Bruno and Ricardo:
...unless you remove the "boundries" as well - I think.
That would end up for "nothing" with a POINT, which is still a
point and not nothing. (If you eliminate the point???)
John M
I think we agree John. Pure nothingness makes no sense. Pure non-
consciousness makes no sense either.
And besides, with the comp assumption, we have to assume the numbers
and addition and multiplication, if not, words like "digital" have
no meaning.
Bruno
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 2:55 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 09 May 2012, at 21:39, R AM wrote:
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 8:23 PM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 09 May 2012, at 17:09, R AM wrote:
"nothing" could also be obtained by removing the curly brackets
from the empty set {}.
Noooo... Some bit of blank remains. If it was written on hemp, you
could smoke it. That's not nothing!
Don't confuse the notion and the symbols used to point to the
notion. Which you did, inadvertently I guess.
I was using the analogy between items contained in sets and things
contained in bags. The curly brackets would represent the bags.
Removing things from a bag leaves it empty. Removing the bag
leaves ... nothing.
Nothing in the universe of sets. But this makes not much sense. And
you have still an empty universe. Then you will tell me to remove
all universes, but you will still get an empty multiverse. Oh, you
can get rid of all multiverses, but you will still have an empty
multi-multiverse. Oh, you can reiterate this in the
transfinite, ... but you need some rich theory at the metalevel,
then. Absolute nothingness does not make sense in my opinion.
Sure, like 0 is some sort of nothing in Number theory, and like
quantum vacuum is some sort of nothing in QM. Nothing is a theory
dependent notion. (Not so for the notion of computable functions).
Yes, these concrete nothings are well behaved, unlike the absolute
nothing, which we don't know what rules it obey (in case it is a
meaningful concept, which it might not be).
OK.
Extensionally, the UD is a function from nothing (no inputs) to
nothing (no outputs), but then what a worker!
Extensionally it belongs to { } ^ { }. It is a function from { }
to { }.
But I guess that is because the UD generates internally all
possible inputs for all possible programs, isn't it.
Right.
Bruno
Ricardo.
--
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
.
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-
[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
.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-
[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
.
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 [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
.
--
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
.
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 [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.
