On 8/19/2012 12:39 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:

    You don't really 'come to the idea' at all though, you assume it
    from the start. There is no theory for why or how numbers would
    dream, only the assumption that they do.

    Here I absolutely disagree. The theory is that I am a material
    machine. The conclusion is that matter is an hallucination, yet a
    lawful one. It looks like you have not yet take a deep look on UDA.

I conclude that matter is a hallucination also, but not our hallucination. Matter begins as the (shared, intentional) hallucination of our molecular subselves. The key though, is that the extent to which our experience is distant from our molecular sub-realities is directly proportional to the realism and involuntary nature of our experience with matter.

Dear Craig and Bruno,

This just might be a way of dealing with the "substitution level" question if we go a bit deeper to the atomic! If we think of the material world as defined at the atomic level and consider them as the basic entity having a model logic ala comp, Craig use of electromagnetic forces would be even more justified. We could use a physicist's thoughts on this...

It's confusing to me when you say that we are a material machine, yet matter is a hallucination, so that means we are a hallucination machine - which is ok by me, but why bring matter into it at all? What makes some hallucinations into matter?

I answer this question by noting that if multiple entities have "hallucinations" that are in a relation such that there exists a transformation between them, such as what we see in a diffeomorphism between coordinate systems, then a "common world of matter" seems to inevitably follow. (This is what the bisimulation algebra that I worked on seeks to formally represent...) The key is to think of the properties involved. What are the properties of matter that give it its "substance"? Electrostatic repulsion at the molecular level plays a huge role... What would be the logical dual of this effect? Pask considered this in his claim of "No Doppelgangers" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Pask#No_Doppelgangers

My view is that the same thing that gives the hallucinations significance (makes them more narrative and eidetic, more pull toward gestalt coherence) has a symmetric exhaust in the form of entropy...which is space.

Space. as I define it, is the multiplicity of possible places that an object could be located. Time is the common perceived sequencing of events. But what is pushing the events to change in the first place? Why not just a frozen static relation? Some people have pointed to a deep level inconsistency, like the omega-inconsistency idea.

"omega inconsistency,
n. (Philosophy) the apparent paradox that occurs when the principle of induction fails, that is, when it is not possible to infer from the fact that each element of a domain has a property that all of them have it. It is so called since the paradigm case is that of the finite ordinal numbers, each of which has a finite successor while they clearly do not all have a finite successor as the set of finite ordinals is the smallest infinite ordinal, omega. A philosophical example, due to Russell, is that it is part of the concept of desire that one wants each of one's desires to be satisfied, but amongst those desires is the apparently inconsistent desire to face new challenges, that is, to leave some of one's desires unsatisfied; thus one can satisfy any of one's desires but not all of them. This paradox seems best resolved by observing a change of the scope of the universal quantifier."

This is a nice article on the subject: http://beitiathustra.wordpress.com/2005/11/30/brief-explanation-of-omega-inconsistency/

A change in scope of the universal quantifier is still a change that has to be accounted for. What is change coming from? What if []<> itself is globally inconsistent? My dear friend Prof. Hitoshi Kitada wrote on this:

from http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0212092v1.pdf

"The class φ is the first world, the Universe, which is completely chaotic. In other words, φ is “absolute inconsistent self-identity” in the sense of Kitarou Nishida, whose meaning was later clarified by Ronald Swan in the form stated above. In this clarifi-
cation, φ can be thought “absolute nothingness” in Hegel’s sense.
The Universe φ is contradictory, and hence its truth value is constantly oscillating between the two extremal values or poles, truth and false, or +1 and −1, or more generally, inside a unit sphere of C. Namely, the class φ as a set of wff’s of the set theory S is countable, but the values which the elements of φ take vary on a unit sphere. In other words, the
Universe φ is a stationary oscillation, when we see its meaning."

    This has implications for the Measure problem!

It is space/entropy which provides Cantor-set-like statistical gaps in which the various layers of realism can break down in peace. The gaps are where the dreams hide their unrealism and forgives their continuity errors. The world of matter looks like it makes perfect sense, but to our molecular selves, it may be a timeless chaos of conflicting orders.




"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.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to