On 10/28/2012 10:52 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 27 Oct 2012, at 17:02, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 10/27/2012 10:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 26 Oct 2012, at 20:30, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 10/26/2012 8:44 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Dear Bruno and Alberto,
I agree some what with both of you. As to the idea of a "genetic
algorithm can isolate anticipative programs", I think that
is the analogue of inertia for computations, as Mach saw inertia.
a relation between any one and the class of computations that it
to such that any incomplete string has a completion in the
of others like it. This is like an error correction or compression
ROGER: For what it's worth--- like Mach's inertia, each monad
mirrors the rest of the universe.
Yes, but the idea is that the mirroring that each monad does of
each other's "percepts" (not the universe per se!) is not an exact
isomorphism between the monads. There has to be a difference
between monads or else there is only One.
Right, and in the arithmetical Indra Net, all universal numbers are
And the, by the first person indeterminacy it is like there is a
competition between all of them to bring your most probable next
"instant of life". It looks that, at least on the sharable part,
there are big winners, like this or that quantum hamiltonian. But we
have to explain them through the arithmetical Net structure, if we
want separate properly the quanta from the qualia.
A slightly technical question. In the arithmetic IndraNet idea,
what plays the role of the "surface" that is reflective?
reread carefully the UDA. You should understand by yourself that the
"surface" role is played by the first person experience. This is due
to the fact that the experience are UD-delay invariant, and is a
limiting sum on the infinite works of an infinite collection of
My worry is that you seem to assume the equivalent of an absolute
observer that acts to distinguish the content of the first person
experience (1p) from each other, as simply an inherent difference
between "universal numbers". Given that one number can be used to code
for other numbers, ala Godel numbering schemes, how is it that universal
numbers can be said to have any thing unique that would identify them in
a non-trivial way?
How do we get the numbers to appear separated from each other?
This comes from elementary arithmetic, although I am not sure why you
are using of the word "appear" instead of "are".
"Are"? To who are they different? Your idea here seems to depend on
a pre-established harmony like situation.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at