On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:19 PM, Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]> wrote:
> Stephen, > > Even worse, and less applicable to reality if it's really true, but Jason > is clearly talking about sequences of computations, and befores and afters. > How can sequences occur if there's no time? > The sequence is defined naturally by the successive states of the computation. > And how does time arise? > > >From the first-person perspectives of the conscious entities that may arise within those computations. > Seems awfully unrealistic to me.... > > How so / what specifically do you find unrealistic? Jason > Edgar > > > On Friday, December 27, 2013 11:11:04 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote: > >> Dear Edgar, >> >> In Bruno's Platonia there is no such thing as "time" so we can not make >> arguments involving "cycles of time". All just "exists". >> >> >> On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:08 PM, Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Jason, >>> >>> Let me point out one fatal problem with Bruno's theory as you present it. >>> >>> According to you there is some single processor that runs all this UD >>> stuff, but the truth is that in actual computational reality every logical >>> element functions as a processor so all computations proceed at once in >>> every cycle of time. This is the only way everything in the universe could >>> possibly get computed. A computation here can't possibly wait for one on >>> the other side of the universe! >>> >>> If Bruno's UD requires a single processor of reality it simply cannot >>> describe actual computational reality..... >>> >>> Edgar >>> >>> >>> >>> On Friday, December 27, 2013 10:41:39 PM UTC-5, Jason wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:20 PM, LizR <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> There is one point to add which I think you've missed, Jason >>>>> (apologies if I've misunderstood). The UD generates the first instruction >>>>> of the first programme, then the first instruction of the second >>>>> programme, >>>>> and so on. Once it has generated the first instruction of every possible >>>>> programme, it then adds the second instruction of the first programme, the >>>>> second instruction of the second programme, and so on. >>>>> >>>> >>>> If it did work like this, it would never get to run the second >>>> instruction of any program, since there is a countable infinity of possible >>>> programs. >>>> >>>> >>>>> This is why it's called a dovetailer, I believe, and stops it running >>>>> into problems with non-halting programmes, or programmes that would crash, >>>>> or various other contingencies... >>>>> >>>> >>>> This is addressed by not trying to run any one program to its >>>> completion, instead it gives each program it has generated up to that point >>>> some time on the CPU. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> This isn't intrinsic to the UD, which could in principle write the >>>>> first programme before it moves on to the next one - but it allows it to >>>>> avoid certain problems caused by having a programme that writes other >>>>> programmes. >>>>> >>>> >>>> There is no program with the UD encountering programs that themselves >>>> instantiate other programs. Indeed, the UD encounters itself, infinitely >>>> often. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> ...I think. I'm sure Bruno will let me know if that's wrong. >>>>> >>>>> :) >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> PS I like the "while (true)" statement. What would Pontius Pilate have >>>>> made of that? :-) >>>> >>>> >>>> :-) Good question, I haven't the faintest idea. I could have used >>>> "while (i == i)" but then if someday Brent's paralogic takes over, it might >>>> fail. >>>> >>>> Jason >>>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >>> Google Groups "Everything List" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ >>> topic/everything-list/sqWzozazMg0/unsubscribe. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Kindest Regards, >> >> Stephen Paul King >> >> Senior Researcher >> >> Mobile: (864) 567-3099 >> >> [email protected] >> >> http://www.provensecure.us/ >> >> >> “This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of >> the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain >> information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential and >> exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may be constituted as >> attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are >> hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of >> this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this >> message in error, notify sender immediately and delete this message >> immediately.” >> > -- > 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. > -- 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.
