On 01 Sep 2012, at 19:19, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/1/2012 7:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Yes, that is for the first person time order, and thus for the
physical time too, as the whole physics emerges from the first
person plural indeterminacy. But to define computation, we need a
thrid person time, and for this one, as the UD illustrates, we
need only the natural number canonical order: 0, 1, 2, 3, ...
That's sort of a no-person time;
OK.
a time not experienced or accessible to anyone.
?
0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, ...
I just access it right now.
I don't think so. You just thought and typed those numbers in the 1p
time your were already experiencing;
OK. But that makes not the point non valid.
which is easily shown since you would experience it as well if you
had typed 1,9,8,3,2,5,7,4,...
Not OK. I do experience just now quite well the order
"1,9,8,3,2,5,7,4", yes. But I don't experience at all
"1,9,8,3,2,5,7,4 ...",
Bruno
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.
