On 23 Apr 2013, at 22:07, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 5:11:06 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 22 Apr 2013, at 19:14, Craig Weinberg wrote:
A quote from someone on Facebook. Any comments?
"Computers can only do computations for rational numbers, not for
real numbers. Every number in a computer is represented as
rational. No computer can represent pi or any other real number...
So even when consciousness can be explained by computations, no
computer can actually simulate it."
You can represent many real numbers by the program computing their
approximation. You can fan constructively on all real numbers (like
the UD does notably).
Only if a brain uses some non computable real number as an oracle,
with all decimals given in one "strike", then we cannot simulate it
with Turing machine, but this needs to make the mind actually
infinite.
If the mind is what is real, then there are no decimals.
But there are decimal, and so if you are correct, the mind is not
real. But the mind is real, so you are not correct.
The brain is the public representation of the history, and as such,
it can only be observed from the reduced 3p set of qualia. The 3p
reduction may rationalize the appearance. From an absolute
perspective, all phenomena are temporary partitions within the one
"strike" of eternity.
OK.
So the statement above is just a statement of non-comp, not an
argument for non comp, as it fails to give us what is that non
computable real playing a role in cognition.
What does the machine say when we ask it why it can't understand pi
without approximating it?
One machine can answer "It seems that I can understand PI without
approximating it. PI is the ratio of the length of a circle divided by
its perimeter, and a circle is the locus of the point in a plane which
share the same distance with respect to some point." Then the machine
drew a circle on the ground and said, look, it seems PI is about a
tiny bigger than 3.
But there is something correct. A computer, nor a brain, can
simulate consciousness. Nor can a computer simlulate the number one,
or the number two. It has to borrow them from arithmetical truth.
Then why would your son in law's computer brain provide him with
consciousness?
It is not the computer brain which provides him consciousness. The
computer brain provides him a way to manifest his consciousness in
your restaurant, and to get pleasant qualia of some good food (I
hope). What provides the consciousness is God, or (arithmetical)
truth. Nobody can program that, in the same sense than nobody can
program the number one. But we can write program making possible to
manifest the number one, or to make some consciousness manifest
relatively to you.
Bruno
Craig
Bruno
--
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
