On 02 Oct 2012, at 19:48, John Clark wrote:
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 Craig Weinberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> Any meta-molecular system is going to be complex compared to a
molecular system,
That's what "meta" means, and a very big thing is larger than a big
thing.
Once a theory is rich enough (like the L machine), it can serve as its
own meta-theory. That's the key of comp.
That's how the comp ontology (numbers and their laws) entails its own
many interpretations, in some precise sense, somehow in the mind of
the many universal numbers.
That sense is akin to how Everett QM seems to justify its statistical
interpretation, which I think partially follows from Gleason Theorem
(the probability measure is entailed somehow by the Hilbert space
structure, for the dimension bigger than three).
If comp is true, and if the Theaetical definition of knowledge is
reasonable, the arithmetical quantum logic (the four material
hypostases)should be constrained enough to have ortholattice semantics
making, similarly to QM, the comp measure (on the sigma_1 sentences,
or 'pieces of computation') unique. Comp lacks its "Gleason theorem"
to verify this.
Comp entails a relative state interpretation of arithmetic (or of any
other first order specification of a Turing universal system).
Bruno
> The inorganic geology of the Earth as a whole is much more complex
than a single cell
Bullshit!! Geology may be large but if we're talking complexity it's
finger painting compared to the smallest cell.
> Darwin wasn't trying to explain awareness itself.
That was part of Darwin's genius, picking the right problem to work
on. He knew that explaining awareness was out of reach in his day as
it is in ours so he didn't waste his time trying, he also knew that
explaining the origin of life was out of reach although it's
starting to become so in our day. Darwin figured that the problem of
how a self reproducing organism could diversify into a bewildering
number of species, one of which had a very large brain and opposable
thumbs, might be within reach for a man of sufficient talent in his
day. And He was right.
> There is no bridge however from evolution of biological forms and
functions to the origin of experience,
I might not know exactly how that bridge operates but I know that
such a bridge between experience and intelligence MUST exist because
otherwise experience could not have evolved on this planet; and it
has, at least once for certain, and probably billions of times.
> It [Evolution] offers no hint of why complex intelligence should
be living organisms and not mineral-based mechanisms.
If you'd read the post that I sent TWICE in the month of September
you'd know that Darwin's theory does explain why that is, but the
post was rather long and it did contain a few big words and so you
didn't read it and prefer to keep asking the same questions over and
over.
> > Before long one generation of computers will design the next
more advanced generation, and the process will accelerate
exponentially.
> Maybe. My guess is that in 50 years, someone will still be saying
the same thing.
Somebody will be saying that in 50 years no doubt about it, but the
someone won't be biological.
> If tools couldn't do something that people can't then there would
be no point in them making tools. And water vapor can't smash your
house but water vapor can make a tornado and a tornado can.
> But water vapor can't make tools no matter how fast it's moving or
for how long. We can choose to make tools which extend the power of
our intentions
There are reasons that water vapor makes tornadoes and there are
reasons that humans make tools.
>> Biology doesn't have any cosmic purpose for existing, but there
are reasons.
> Are there?
Yes.
> Like what?
I've answered this before: Chemistry, a planet with liquid water, a
energy source like the sun, and lots of time. There is no purpose in
any of that because intelligence is in the purpose conferring
business not chemistry or water or energy or time. So there is no
purpose to biology but there are reasons.
John K Clark
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]
.
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 [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
