On 11/9/2012 2:03 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 09 Nov 2012, at 12:01, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Bruno
In my discussions of intelligence, I define intelligence
as the ability to (fairly freely) make one's own choices.
OK.
That implies through the word "own" that there is a
fixed identity, the chooser
OK.
A picture of this might be the triad:
choice A choice B
\ /
The chooser,
which must have
a fixed identity
OK.
Dear Roger and Bruno,
It seems to me that we automatically get a 'fixed identity' when we
consider each observer's 1p to be defined by a bundle or sheaf of an
infinite number of computations. The chooser of A and of B is one and
the same if and only if the computational bundle that make the choice of
A also make the choice of B. What you are considering is just an example
of my definition of reality. ;-)
Is there a chooser in comp ? Meaning a fixed identity ?
Yes. But we might have a problem to know who it is.
The problem disappears if multiple observers have a way to 'locate'
an incarnation of the computational bundle.
Does a Turing machine have a fixed identity to make such choices
(or do anything)?
Perhaps, but the she can become amnesic and forget who she is, and she
might be deluded on many things, but she can also remember, but I
don't know how much.
A forgetful observer is the one that we see in the case of a
Boltzmann brain.
--
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 [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.
