On 02 Jul 2012, at 20:12, meekerdb wrote:
On 7/2/2012 7:36 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
Do you really not see any difference between tables and chairs and
people and numbers,
Chairs and people are also mathematical objects, just really
complex ones with a large information content. This is the
necessary conclusion of anyone who believes physical laws are
No, it's a necessary conclusion of anyone who cannot distinguish a
description from the thing described.
I can follow you on this. the fact that the chair obeys mathematical
laws does not logically entail per se that the chair is a mathematical
object. But comp does not give any choice in the matter, as I have
A non mathematical chair cannot select a mathematical comp
consciousness without both the chair and the consciousness being non
Turing emulable. Your argument might apply on Tegmark, but obviously
Tegmark does not take the 1-comp indeterminacy into account.
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