On 13 Sep 2012, at 22:04, Brian Tenneson wrote:
You use B as a predicate symbol for "belief" I think.
I use for the modal unspecified box, in some context (in place of the
more common "").
Then I use it mainly for the box corresponding to Gödel's beweisbar
(provability) arithmetical predicate (definable with the symbols E, A,
&, ->, ~, s, 0 and parentheses.
Thanks to the fact that Bp -> p is not a theorem, it can plays the
role of believability for the ideally correct machines.
What are some properties of B and is there a predicate for knowing/
being aware of that might lead to a definition for self-awareness?
Yes, B and its variants:
B_1 p == Bp & p
B_2 p = Bp & Dt
B_3 p = Bp & Dt & t,
btw, what is a machine and what types of machines are there?
With comp we bet that we are, at some level, digital machine. The
theory is one studied by logicians (Post, Church, Turing, etc.).
Is there a generic description for a structure (in the math logic
sense) to have a belief or to be aware; something like
A |= "I am the structure A"
Yes, by using the Dx = xx method, you can define a machine having its
integral 3p plan available. But the 1p-self, given by Bp & p, does not
admit any name. It is the difference between "I have two legs" and "I
have a pain in a leg, even if a phantom one". G* proves them
equivalent (for correct machines), but G cannot identify them, and
they obeys different logic (G and S4Grz).
Finally, on a different note, if there is a structure for which all
structures can be 1-1 injected into it, does that in itself imply a
sort of ultimate structure perhaps what Max Tegmark views as the
level IV multiverse?
A 1-1 map is too cheap for that, and the set structure is a too much
structural flattening. Comp used the simulation, notion, at a non
specifiable level substitution.
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