On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net>wrote:

>  On 2/20/2013 1:08 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net>wrote:
>
>>   On 2/19/2013 8:08 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Stephen P. King 
>> <stephe...@charter.net>wrote:
>>
>>>   On 2/19/2013 12:26 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 4:58 AM, Richard Ruquist <yann...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 2:03 AM, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 3:18 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On 2/18/2013 11:47 AM, Terren Suydam wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> If God is arithmetical truth, then what if anything is there to be
>>>> said
>>>> >> about its "character"? I know from a formal perspective the answer is
>>>> >> nothing, because nothing formal can be said about truth.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> This is more of an informal question, and comes out of my innate
>>>> desire to
>>>> >> anthropomorphize.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Why would you suppose that your desire to anthropomorphize is
>>>> anything
>>>> >> other than wishful thinking?  Do you also have a desire to
>>>> anthropormorphize
>>>> >> the periodic table?  the solar system?  the infinitesimal calculus?
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Within comp, there are many minds that have infinite computations
>>>> resources
>>>> > at their disposal.  They can evolve forever, and approach infinite
>>>> > intelligence and knowledge.  They all explore the same mathematical
>>>> truth
>>>> > and thus having the same data (that of mathematical truth they
>>>> explore)
>>>> > together with near infinite intelligence, they are almost never wrong
>>>> on any
>>>> > question or matter.  Thus, despite possibly different origins, they
>>>> are all
>>>> > of a like mind, opinion, and possibly character.  The number of
>>>> fundamental
>>>> > questions on which these super intelligence disagree goes towards
>>>> zero as
>>>> > their intelligence goes towards infinity.
>>>>
>>>>  If our universe is holographic, the computational resources are
>>>> limited to the Lloyd Limit of 10^120 bits, with a maximum possible
>>>> 10^122 bits
>>>> Ref: http://arxiv.org/ftp/astro-ph/papers/0602/0602420.pdf
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I was not proposing that our universe could support infinite
>>> computational resources, but that some other universes might, and
>>> intelligent beings/civilizations in those universes are unbounded.
>>>
>>> Jason
>>>   --
>>>
>>> Hi Jason,
>>>
>>>     Would you care to speculate whether or not those demi-gods (in other
>>> universes that have access to infinite resources) would have Platonist
>>> theories of mathematics?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Any question to me of the form "Do I think the demi-gods will believe X",
>> boils down to "Do I think X is correct?".  I think you know where I stand
>> on Platonist theories of mathematics.  Whether or not the demi-gods also
>> believe it mostly depends on whether its correct or if it has more credence
>> than the other alternatives.
>>
>> Jason
>>
>>
>>  Hi Jason,
>>
>>     It seems to me that the demi-gods would not be motivated to have
>> Platonist-like ontologies. As I see things, only we of finite resources
>> concoct such Platonist theories to give ourselves the illusion of
>> superpowers to explain away the mysterious fact that we can understand
>> mathematics. I have yet to see a neo-Platonist explain without hand-waving
>> how it is that a physical brain can access knowledge from Platonia.
>>
>
> I made such a proposal about 2 months ago in a thread titled "How
> mathematical truth might enter our universe".  You posted in the thread but
> never directly to my original post on the matter.  Feel free to re-ignite
> that thread if you would like to discuss this topic further.
>
> Jason
>   --
>
>
> Hi Jason,
>
>     Somehow I missed it. Here it is again for my comment.
>
> On 12/12/2012 11:00 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
>
> All,
>
> One of the questions in mathematics is where does mathematical truth come
> from, if it exists platonically, how does it manifest physically (e.g. as
> the utterances of mathematicians).
>
> I had a thought inspired by one of Roger's posts regarding cause and
> effect extending outside of spacetime.  I thought, there is nothing
> preventing the goings on in this universe from having causal implications
> outside our universe.  Consider that an advanced civilization might choose
> to simulate our universe and inspect it.  Then when they observe what
> happens in our universe the observations generate causal effects in their
> own universe.  The same applies to our universe, we might choose to observe
> another universe through simulation, and our discoveries or observations of
> that other universe change us.  Thus, the various universes that can exist
> out there are more interconnected than we might suppose.  Our universe is
> an open book to those universes possessing sufficient computational power
> to simulate it.  Likewise, how simple universes like certain small
> instances of the game of life are open books to us.  The possibilities of
> gliders in the GoL has led to many discussions about GoL gliders, their
> existence in the GoL universe has led to the manifestation of physical
> changes in our own universe.
>
> I think the entrance of mathematical truth to our own universe is no
> different.  Mathematicians have used their minds to simulate objects and
> structures that exist in other universes, in a sense they observe them, and
> then those mathematicians report their observations and discoveries
> concerning those objects, just as an advanced civilization might report
> discoveries about our universe, or we might report discoveries about the
> GoL universe.  Thus the structures and objects which exist in other
> universes have directly changed the course of the evolution of our own.
>
> Jason
>
>     I pretty much agree with all of this post. I would only add that some
> consideration needs to be made of the resource availability issue. If a
> given system X does not have sufficient access to resources to simulate Y,
> then X cannot 'know' all of Y.
>
>
>
Thanks Stephen.  I agree with your addition.

Jason

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to