On 5/21/2012 10:56 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:


2012/5/22 Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net <mailto:stephe...@charter.net>>

    On 5/21/2012 3:49 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:


    2012/5/21 Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net 
<mailto:stephe...@charter.net>>

        On 5/21/2012 7:54 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:


        2012/5/21 Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net 
<mailto:stephe...@charter.net>>

            On 5/21/2012 1:55 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:

                No it's not a computation, it arises because at every step,
                computations diverge into new sets of infinite computations, 
giving
                rise to the 1p indeterminacy.

                Quentin

             Hi Quentin,

               So could we agree that the idea that the universe is 
defined/determined
            ab initio ("in the beginning") is refuted by this?



        I don't know what you mean here... but in comp the universe per se does 
not
        exist, it emerges from computations and is not an object by itself
        (independent of computations).


        Dear Quentin,

            My interest is philosophy so I am asking questions in an attempt to 
learn
        about peoples ideas. Now I am learning about yours. Your sentence here 
implies
        to me that only "objects" (considered as capable of being separate and 
isolated
        from all others) can "exist". Only "objects" exist and not, for example,
        processes. Is this correct?


    No, it depends what you mean by existing. When I say "in comp the universe 
per se
    does not exist", I mean it does not exist ontologically as it emerge from
    computations. Existence means different thing at different level.

    Does a table exist ? It depends at which level you describe it.

    Dear Quentin,

        I am trying to understand exactly how you think and define words.

        By "exist"


Existence is dependent on the level of description, and can be seperated by what exists ontologically and what exists epistemologically. So it depends on the theory you use to define existence.

I would favor a theory which would define existence by what can be experienced/observed. Maybe it's a lack of imagination, but I don't know what it would mean for a thing to exist and never be observed/experienced.


You're not likely to experience a quark or even an atom. What exists is determined by your model of the world. Even parts of the model that make no possible difference to the experiences the model predicts may be kept because they make the theory simpler, e.g. infinitesimal distances in physics.

Brent

    are you considering capacity of the referent of a word, say table, of being 
actually
    experiencing by anyone that might happen to be in its vecinity or otherwise 
capable
    of being causally affected by the presence and non-presence of the table?



    I still don't understand what you mean by "the idea that the universe is
    defined/determined ab initio ("in the beginning") is refuted by this".

    Regards,
    Quentin

        Don't worry about that for now. Let us nail down what "existence" is 
first.

-- Onward!

    Stephen

    "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 everything-list@googlegroups.com
    <mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>.
    To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
    everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
    <mailto:everything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
    For more options, visit this group at
    http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.




--
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 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.

--
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.

Reply via email to