On 21 Dec 2013, at 00:52, Edgar Owen wrote:

## Advertising

All,The fundamental nature of reality is examined in detail in my recentbook on Reality available on Amazon under my name.Marchal is on the right track, but reality consists not just ofnumbers (math)

`Arithmetic is not just numbers, but numbers + some laws (addition and`

`multiplication).`

but is a running logical structure analogous to software

`When you have the laws (addition and multiplication), it can be shown`

`that a tiny part of arithmetic implement all possible computations`

`(accepting Church thesis). Without Church thesis, you can still prove`

`that that tiny part of arithmetic emulates (simulate exactly) all`

`Turing (or all known) computations.`

that continually computes the current state of the universe.

`You mean the physical universe. Have you read my papers or posts? if`

`we are machine, there is no physical reality that we can assume. the`

`whole of physics must be derived from arithmetic.`

Just as software includes but doesn't consist only of numbers andmath, so does reality.

It depends on your initial assumption.

In fact the equations of physical science make sense only whenembedded in a logical structure just as is the case in computationalreality.

`The computational reality is a tiny part of arithmetic. Logic is just`

`a tool to explore such realities.`

Modern science has a major lacuna, the notion that all of reality ismathematical,

`Most scientists do not believe this, and indeed criticize my work for`

`seeming to go in that direction.`

Then term like "reality" and "mathematical" are very fuzzy.

`Now, if we are machine, then it can be shown that for the ontology we`

`need arithmetic, or any equivalent Turing universal system, and we`

`*cannot* assume anything more (that is the key non obvious point).`

`Then, it is shown that the physical reality is:`

1) an internal aspect of arithmetic

`2) despite this, it is vastly bigger than arithmetic and even that any`

`conceivable mathematics. That is why I insist that the reality we can`

`access to is not mathematical, but "theological". It contains many`

`things provably escaping all possible sharable mathematics.`

`That arithmetic is (much) bigger viewed from inside than viewed from`

`outside is astonishing, and is a sort of Skolem paradox (not a`

`contradiction, just a weirdness).`

that prevents science from grasping the complete nature of reality.In truth all of reality is logical, as is software, and themathematics is just a subset of the logic.

`I disagree, with all my respect. Even arithmetic escapes logic. It is`

`logic which is just a branch of math, but math, even just arithmetic,`

`escapes logic. Arithmetical truth escapes all effective theories`

`(theories with checkable proofs).`

After all, modern science with its misguided insistence that all ofreality is mathematical,

`I really do not believe this. Except for Tegmark and Schmidhuber, I`

`doubt any scientist believes this. But its is a consequence of`

`computationalism, for the ontology. Yet, the physical is purely`

`epistemological, and go beyond mathematics. I show that all universal`

`machine, when believeing in enough induction axioms, can discovered`

`this by introspection only.`

has had nothing useful to say about the nature of eitherconsciousness or the present moment, the two most fundamentalaspects of experience.

I suggest you read my sane paper.: http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/publications/SANE2004MARCHALAbstract.html

`It explains the present moment by using GĂ¶del form of indexical (with`

`explicit fixed points), including the non communicable part, the`

`qualia, and also the quanta (making computationalism testable).`

`In fact machines have already an incredibly rich and complex theology,`

`and it is testable, as it should contain physics.`

However I present a computational based information approach tothese in my book among many other things.The second clarification that needs to be made to the post onMarchal's work is that human math and logic are distinct from theactual math and logic that computes reality.

`With computationalism, reality is not computed. Most of the`

`arithmetical reality is already highly not computable.`

`The (partially) computable part of arithmetic is the sigma_1 part (the`

`sentences having the shape ExP(x) with P decidable). Abobe it is no`

`more computable.`

`The whole of the arithmetical reality is the union of all the sigma_i`

`and pi_i parts, and is far beynd what we can compute or emulate with a`

`computer.`

`The the human arithmetic and arithmetic are well distinguished in my`

`presentations, so I am not sure to what you allude too.`

`For computation, Church thesis makes it a *very* general human`

`independent notion.`

The human version is a generalized and extended approximation of theactual that differs from the actual logico-mathematical structure ofreality in important ways (e.g. infinities and infinitesimals whichdon't actually exist in external reality).

`You seem to assume a primitive physical universe. ("primitive" means`

`that it would have to be assumed).`

I can explain further if anyone is interested, or you can read aboutit in my book...

`I might take a look, but, with all my respect, I am not sure you grasp`

`modern logic, as you seem to confuse computation, logic, and math, and`

`to confuse digital physics (there is a physical reality and it is`

`computable) with computationalism (3-I is a machine), which entails`

`that physics emerges from computations in a non computable way. Do you`

`take into account the First person indeterminacy? This is not well`

`known, but is really the basic block needed to see why the physical`

`reality emerges non computably from very elementary computable`

`arithmetic. Let me insist on that fundamental point: If my body can be`

`emulated by a machine, then neither mind nor matter appearance can be`

`entirely emulable by a machine.`

`Above our comp substitution level, we are confronted with enumerable`

`sets of universal numbers, and below the substitution level, we are`

`confronted with a continuum of different computations involving all`

`universal numbers simultaneously. In fact the problem of comp relies`

`in the justification of the apparent computability of the known`

`physical laws (the white rabbit problem).`

Bruno 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 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.