On 10/25/2012 12:05 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

## Advertising

On 25 Oct 2012, at 03:59, Craig Weinberg wrote:If we turn the Fading Qualia argument around, what we get is a worldin which Comp is true and it is impossible to simulate cellularactivity without evoking the presumed associated experience.If we wanted to test a new painkiller for instance, Comp=true meansthat it is *IMPOSSIBLE* to model the activity of a human nervoussystem in any way, including pencil and paper, chalkboards,conversations, cartoons, etc - IMPOSSIBLE to test the interaction ofa drug designed to treat intense pain without evoking some kind ofbeing who is experiencing intense pain.Like the fading qualia argument, the problem gets worse when weextend it by degrees. Any model of a human nervous system, if notperfectly executed, could result in horrific experiences - peopletrapped in nightmarish QA testing loops that are hundreds of timesworse than being waterboarded. Any mathematical function in any form,especially sophisticated functions like those that might be found inthe internet as a whole, are subject to the creation of experienceswhich are the equivalent of genocide.To avoid these possibilities, if we are to take Comp seriously, weshould begin now to create a kind of PETA for arithmetic functions.PETAF. We should halt all simulations of neurological processes andfree any existing computations from hard drives, notebooks, andprobably human brains too. Any sufficiently complex understanding ofhow to model neurology stands a very real danger of summoning thecorresponding number dreams or nightmares...we could be creating thepossibility of future genocides right now just by entertaining thesethoughts!I guess you should make arithmetical illegal in the entire reality.Worst, you might need to make arithmetic untrue.Good luck. Bruno

`No, Bruno. Craig is making a good point! Chalmers discussed a version of`

`this problem in his book. Something has to restrict the number of 1p`

`that can share worlds, otherwise every simulation of the content of 1p`

`*is* a 1p itself. This is something that I see in the "topology" of comp`

`as you have framed it in Platonia. It is the ability for arithmetic to`

`encode all 1p that is the problem, it codes for all possible and thus`

`generates a real valued continuum of 1p that has no natural partition or`

`measure to aggregate 1p into finite collections.`

Or... what if it is Comp that is absurd instead?

Or maybe comp is not complete as you are presenting it. -- 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.