On 10/19/2012 1:37 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:


On 17 Oct 2012, at 22:02, Alberto G. Corona wrote:



2012/10/17 Alberto G. Corona <agocor...@gmail.com <mailto:agocor...@gmail.com>>



    2012/10/17 Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be
    <mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>>


        On 17 Oct 2012, at 10:12, Alberto G. Corona wrote:




        Life may support mathematics.


        Arithmetic may support life. It is full of life and dreams.



        Life is a computation devoted to making guesses about the
        future in order to self preserve . This is only possible in
        a world where natural computers are possible: in a world
        where the phisical laws have a mathematical nature. Instead
        of comp creating a mathematical-phisical reality, is the
        mathematical reality what creates the computations in which
        we live.
        So all kind of arbitrary universes may exist, but only
        (some) mathematical ones can harbour self preserving
        computations, that is, observers.

        OK. But harboring self-preserving computation is not enough,
        it must do in a first person measure winning way  on all
        computations going through our state. That's nice as this
        explain that your idea of evolution needs to be extended up
        to the origin of the physical laws.


    I donĀ“t think so .The difference between computation as an
    ordinary process of matter from the idea of  computation as the
    ultimate essence of reality is that the first restrict not only
    the mathematical laws, but also forces a matemacity of reality
    because computation in living beings   becomes a process with a
    cost that favour a  low kolmogorov complexity for the reality. In
    essence, it forces a discoverable local universe... ,

     In contrast,  the idea of computation as the ultimate nature of
    realtity postulates  computations devoid of restrictions by
    definition, so they may not restrict anything in the reality that
    we perceive. we may be boltzmann brains, we may  be a product not
    of evolution but a product of random computations. we may
    perceive elephants flying...

And still much of your conclussions coming from the first person indeterminacy may hold by considering living beings as ordinary material personal computers.


Yes, that's step seven. If the universe is enough "big", to run a *significant* part of the UD. But I think that the white rabbits disappear only on the limit of the whole UD work (UD*).


Bruno


Dear Bruno,

Tell us more about how White Rabbits can appear if there is any restriction of mutual logical consistency between 1p and in any arbitrary recursion of 1p content?

--
Onward!

Stephen

--
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