On 14 Jul 2012, at 11:16, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:

## Advertising

On 14.07.2012 11:00 Bruno Marchal said the following:On 14 Jul 2012, at 10:42, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:...If to speak about your theorem, it is unclear to me, how the first person view accesses numbers and mathematical objects.Like a digital machine, which can access numbers encoded in their memory, through logical gates, and so one. More details are given currently on the FOAR list, but the idea is simple, with comp our bodies are statistical first person constructs related to infinities of number relations, so we access to them a bit like a fish can access water. The price of this is that we have to abandon physicalism eventually.I am not sure if I understand. I would like to have an explanationfor a phenomenon, for example1) I see a cat; 2) I see a piece of paper with 2 + 2 = 4. Yet, when you start explaining, the phenomenon seems to disappear.

`1) I see a cat. This is explained by the fact that your current`

`computational state belongs to an infinity of computations making you`

`singling out some stable patterns that you recognize, by access to`

`your previous experience as being cat. The qualia itself is explained`

`by the fact that when you refer to the cat, you are really referring`

`to yourself (with the implicit hope that it corresponds to some`

`relatively independent pattern), and the math shows that such a self-`

`reference involves some true but non rationally communicable feature.`

`The math explained why, if this justification is correct, machines/`

`numbers will not be entirely satisfied by it, for the first person is`

`not a machine from its own first person view.`

`2) The same with "2+2=4 written on some paper". It is also a stable`

`pattern in the computations going through your state. Here you might`

`just refer to what you have learned in school, and you might`

`considered that the truth referred by that sentence on a paper is more`

`stable than a cat, but the conscious perception of cat or ink on paper`

`admits the same explanation: some universal number reflect a pattern`

`belonging to almost all computations going through your state. You`

`have to take the first person indeterminacy into account, and keep in`

`mind that your immediate future is determined by an infinity of`

`computations/universal number, going through your actual state. For`

`example, all the Heisenberg matrices computing the state of the galaxy`

`at some description level for some amount of steps. They all provably`

`exist independently of us in a tiny part of elementary arithmetic, and`

`admit at least as many variants as there are possible electron`

`location in their energy level orbitals.`

`I cannot be sure if this helps you as it relies to some familiarity`

`with the first person indeterminacy and the fact that our comp states`

`are distributed in an infinity of distinct, from a third person pov,`

`computations (existing in arithmetic).`

Bruno

Evgenii --You received this message because you are subscribed to the GoogleGroups "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.

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-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.