Hi Richard Ruquist 

Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
10/10/2012 
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen


----- Receiving the following content ----- 
From: Richard Ruquist 
Receiver: everything-list 
Time: 2012-10-09, 08:25:10
Subject: Re: more firewalls


Hi Roger,
What makes you think that what you claim is true?
Richard

On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 8:19 AM, Roger Clough <rclo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Hi Richard Ruquist
>
> Nature has put a firewall between subjective entities such as monads
> and objective entities such as BECs or the manifolds.
> When I said "attached" I should have said "associated to".
> There's no physical, only logical connections.
>
> Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
> 10/9/2012
> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
>
>
> ----- Receiving the following content -----
> From: Richard Ruquist
> Receiver: everything-list
> Time: 2012-10-08, 12:35:34
> Subject: Re: Re: Can computers be conscious ? Re: Zombieopolis 
> ThoughtExperiment
>
>
> Roger,
> Monads are everywhere, inside computers
> as well as humans, rocks and free space.
> Whatever allows monads to connect to physical objects
> may be operative for inanimates as well as animates.
>
> So the first step is to identify the connecting mechanism.
>
> For physical consciousness I conjecture the connection
> is based on BECs (Bose-Einstein Condensates)
> in the monadic mind entangled with BECs in the brain.
>
> It has been demonstrated experimentally
> that BECs of disparate substances can still be entangled.
> So once a computer is designed with BECs as in the human brain
> then it may be capable of consciousness.
> Richard
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
>> Hi Richard Ruquist
>>
>> I may have given that impression, sorry, but
>> a monad can only make what's "inside" do what it can do.
>>
>> Human and animal monads can both feel, so they can be conscious.
>> But a rock is at best unconscious as it cannot feel or think.\
>>
>> There's no way to tell what faculties a computer has.
>>
>> Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
>> 10/8/2012
>> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
>>
>>
>> ----- Receiving the following content -----
>> From: Richard Ruquist
>> Receiver: everything-list
>> Time: 2012-10-07, 11:06:17
>> Subject: Re: Can computers be conscious ? Re: Zombieopolis Thought Experiment
>>
>>
>> Roger,
>>
>> If human consciousness comes from attached monads, as I think you have 
>> claimed,
>> then why could not these monads attach to sufficiently complex computers
>> as well.
>> Richard
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
>>> Hi John Clark
>>>
>>> Unless computers can deal with inextended objects such as
>>> mind and experience, they cannot be conscious.
>>>
>>> Consciousness is direct experience, computers can only deal in descriptions 
>>> of experience.
>>>
>>> Everything that a computer does is, to my knowledge, at least
>>> in principle publicly available, since it uses publicly available symbols 
>>> or code.
>>>
>>> Consciousness is direct experience, which cannot be put down in code
>>> any more than life can be put down in code. It is personal and not publicly 
>>> available.
>>>
>>> Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
>>> 10/7/2012
>>> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Receiving the following content -----
>>> From: John Clark
>>> Receiver: everything-list
>>> Time: 2012-10-06, 13:56:30
>>> Subject: Re: Zombieopolis Thought Experiment
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 6:29 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ?>>I'm openly saying that a high school kid can make a robot that behaves 
>>> sensibly with just a few transistors.? ?
>>>
>>>
>>>> Only because he lives in a universe in which the possibility of teleology 
>>>> is fully supported from the start.
>>>
>>>
>>> We know with absolute certainty that the laws of physics in this universe 
>>> allow for the creation of consciousness, we may not know how they do it but 
>>> we know for a fact that it can be done. So how on Earth does that indicate 
>>> that a conscious computer is not possible? Because it doesn't fart??
>>>
>>> ?
>>>> you have erroneously assumed that intelligence is possible without sense 
>>>> experience.
>>>
>>> No, I am assuming the exact OPPOSITE! In fact I'm not even assuming, I know 
>>> for a fact that intelligent behavior WITHOUT consciousness confers a 
>>> Evolutionary advantage, and I know for a fact that intelligent behavior 
>>> WITH consciousness confers no additional Evolutionary advantage (and if you 
>>> disagree with that point then you must believe that the Turing Test works 
>>> for consciousness too and not just intelligence). And in spite of all this 
>>> I know for a fact that Evolution DID produce consciousness at least once, 
>>> therefore the only conclusion is that consciousness is a byproduct of 
>>> intellagence.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Adenine and Thymine don't have purpose in seeking to bind with each other?
>>>
>>>
>>> I don't even know what a question like that means, who's purpose do you 
>>> expect Adenine and Thymine to serve?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> How do you know?
>>>
>>>
>>> I know because I have intelligence and Adenine and Thymine do not know 
>>> because they have none, they only have cause and effect.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> How is it different from our purpose in staying in close proximity to 
>>>> places to eat and sleep?
>>>
>>>
>>> And to think that some people berated me for anthropomorphizing future 
>>> supercomputers and here you are ? anthropomorphizing simple chemicals.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Why is everything aware, why isn't everything not aware?
>>>
>>>
>>> Because then we wouldn't be aware of having this conversation.
>>>
>>>
>>> And we are aware of having this conversation because everything is aware, 
>>> except of course for computers.
>>> ?
>>>
>>>>> Robots are something?
>>>
>>>> No, they aren't something.
>>>
>>> That is just a little too silly to argue.
>>>
>>> ?
>>>
>>>> Everything is awareness
>>>
>>> Are you certain, I thought everything is klogknee, or maybe its everything 
>>> is 42.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> evolution requires that something be alive to begin with.
>>>
>>> Evolution requires something that can reproduce itself, there is no 
>>> universally agreed on definition of "life" so if you want to say that 
>>> viruses and RNA strings and crystals and clay patterns and Von Neumann 
>>> Machines are alive I won't argue with you and will agree that Evolution 
>>> requires that something be alive to get started.
>>>
>>> ? 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 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.
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>>
>
> --
> 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.
>
> --
> 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.
>

-- 
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.

-- 
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.

Reply via email to