On 27 Sep 2013, at 20:58, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/27/2013 10:42 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 27 Sep 2013, at 04:50, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/26/2013 7:33 PM, LizR wrote:
On 27 September 2013 14:18, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote:
On 9/26/2013 6:47 PM, LizR wrote:
On 27 September 2013 13:03, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote:
On 9/26/2013 6:05 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
This is a sort of cul de sac experience, which has to be
impossible to
create if QTI is true. The existence of a universal dovetailer
entails
the lack of all cul de sac experiences (Comp immortality).
So does it make loss of consciousness impossible? ....under
anesthesia?...forever?
Surely not, because from a first person perspective one just
goes to sleep and wakes up again (or experiences dreams). "No
cul de sac" implies there's no way to stop consciousness
permanently.
I know it implies that, but I see no reason to believe it. The
question isn't whether consciousness continues, but whether
*your* consciousness, a particular consciousness continues. To
say otherwise is like saying you can't
kill the guy in Moscow because he has a duplicate in Washington.
This is the "Haraclitus" problem (or observation, if you don't
consider it a problem). The man can't step into the same river
because he isn't the same man. The consciousness that continues
after any given moment is, presumably, the next moment of
consciousness which is the "best continuation" of the last one.
This seems similar to the view in FOR that the multiverse is made
of "snapshots" which give the appearance of forming continuous
histories (ignoring whether you can slice up space-time into
snapshots...)
But I think this is a confusion. Because computations have states
and nothing corresponding to transition times between states
people are tempted to identify those states with states of
consciousness and make an analogy with frames of film in a movie
(hence 'the movie graph argument'). But there's a huge mismatch
here. A conscious thought has a lot of duration, I'd estimate
around 0.02sec. The underlying computation that sustains the
quasi-classical brain at the quantum level has a time constant on
the order of the Planck time 10^-43sec. And even if it isn't the
quantum level that's relevant, it's obvious that most thinking is
unconscious and a computer emulating your brain would have to go
through many billions or trillions of states to instantiate one
moment of consciousness. That means that at the fundamental level
(of say the UD) there can be huge overlap between one conscious
thought and the next and so they can form a chain, a stream of
consciousness.
So there's a certain amount of "mini-death-and-mini-rebirth"
going on every second in the normal process of consciousness (in
this view). Deciding what counts as a continuation and what
doesn't seems a bit ... problematic. (And of course there are
many continuations from any given moment.)
Not if there's nothing to overlap. Sure there is, by some
measure, a closest next continuation. But when you're eighty
years old and fading out on the operating table, it's going to be
another eighty year old fading out on some other operating table.
I think someone has suggested that if you fade out completely then
the next closest continuation could be a newborn infant who is
just 'fading in'. Which is a nice thought - but is it you?
That happens each time you smoke salvia, you fade into your baby
state (which makes you look like a retard, which you are, in some
sense, or, on higher dose, well beyond the baby states (which
actually knows already a lot, from the "beyond" perspective)). Then
you fade back into the actual "you", at least that is what you
thought, but you can doubt it also.
Deep enough (in the amnesia/disconnection) you can experience a
consciousness state which is experienced as time independent.
Perhaps the consciousness of "all" simple virgin universal machine/
loop/numbers. It would be the roots of the consciousness flux; the
set of all universal numbers (a non recursively enumerable set).
So what do you suppose is the physical effect of salvia in your brain?
Difficult question, but my current theory is that it simply shut down
part of the brain. The shut down of the corpus callosum would explain
the "feminine presence", which would be how the left (analytical
brain, [] p) perceive the right (intuitive, [] p & p) brain, for
example. In that case the right brain is also the one specialized with
our connection to truth (the ultimate platonic goddess!).
Other connecting parts of the brain might be shut down, making us
disconnected from the long term memory, and eventually we would live
the "galois connection" effect, and consciousness would be related to
our possible extensions, in some direct way (linking consciousness
with its logical ancestor: consistency).
Of course this is highly speculative, and we need more physiological
data.
Bruno
Brent
--
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.
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
