2012/5/20 Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net>
> On 5/20/2012 6:06 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
> In Bruno's theory, the physical world is not computed by an algorithm,
> the physical world is the limit of all computations going throught your
> current state... what is computable is your current state, an infinity of
> computations goes through it. So I don't see the problem here, the UD is
> not an algorithm which computes the physical world 4D or whatever.
>> Hi Quentin,
> Maybe you can answer some questions. These might be badly composed so
> feel free to "fix" them. ;-)
> 1) If my "current state" is equivalent to a 4-manifold and the "next"
> state is also, what is connecting the two? Markov's proof tells us that it
> is not a algorithm. So what is it?
Any computations going through your current state has a next state. You
don't have *a* next state but many next state, any state is always computed
by an infinity of computation.
> 2) Is there another equivalent set of words for "the physical world is the
> limit of all computations going through your current state"?
The physical world is the thing that is stable in the majority of
computations that compute your current conscious moment, if
computationalism is true (if consciousness is turing emulable).
> 3) Is there at least one physical system running the computations?
No, if the UDA is correct... well technically there still could be a
primitive physical universe, but you could not use it to correctly predict
your next moment, nor what you see, and you would not be able to know what
it is (because all of what is accessible to you is in the computations that
support you, still if computationalism is true).
> Is the "physical universe" a purely subjective appearance/experience for
> each conscious entity?
It is subjective in the sense that it can be only known subjectively. It is
objective as the thing that each conscious entity can observe.
> What is it that shifts from one state to the next?
> 4) What is the cardinality of "all computations"?
> N0 ? and if we take that to contains oracle program, even the continuum.
> 5) Is the totality of what exists static and timeless and are all of the
> subsets of that totality static and timeless as well?
Time is an internal thing of existence, time is related to an observer.
> 6) Does all "succession of events" emerge only from the well ordering of
> Natural numbers?
Succession of events emerge from the succession of states, of what is
needed to compute you, it does not have to be related to the ordering of
> "Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed."
> ~ Francis Bacon
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> For more options, visit this group at
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at