On 28 Dec 2013, at 00:20, Jason Resch wrote:




On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 6:03 PM, LizR <lizj...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 28 December 2013 11:55, Stephen Paul King <stephe...@provensecure.com > wrote:
Hi LizR,

That is what is not explicitly explained! I could see how one might make an argument based on Godel numbers and a choice of a numbering scheme could show the existence of a string of numbers that, if run on some computer, would generate a description of the interaction of several actors. But this ignores the problems of concurrency and "point of view". The best one might be able to do, AFAIK, is cook up a description of the interactions of many "observers" -each one is an intersection of infinitely many computations, but such a description would itself be the content of some observer's point of view that assumes a choice of Godel numbering scheme.
  Something doesn't seem right about this!

It seems to suggest "multi-solipsism" or something along those lines - which doesn't make it wrong, of course.

I await Bruno's answer with interest. I think he has already said something about this, but I don't recall it being satisfactory, at least to my limited understanding.

I am also interested to hear what Bruno has to say.

I should have read this before answering. Hope you are not too much disappointed :)


My perspective is that most of the computations that support you and I are not isolated and short-lived "computational Boltzmann brains" but much larger, long-running computations such as those that correspond to a universe in which life adapts and evolves.

Yes. I suspect both deep (in Bennett sense) computations, + the physical symmetrical and linear core. This would makes us both relatively very numerous in our type of reality, and relatively very rare at some other level. I suspect also the FPI relative random oracles to play some role in the "continuous" self-multiplication. But this is speculation, and should be derived from self-reference alone, to keep intact the exploitation of the G* minus G difference, on the intensional variants, to have the qualia and their non communicable feature.




The starting conditions for these is much less constrained, and therefore it is far more probable to result in conscious computations such as ours than the case where the computation supporting your brain experiencing this moment is some initial condition of a very specific program. Certainly, those programs exist too, but they are much rarer. They appear in the UD much less frequently than say the program corresponding to the approximate laws of physics of this universe. It takes far more data to describe your brain than it does to describe the physical system on which it is based.

That is right. I think it is the correct intuition, but unfortunately, we cannot use it per se, we have to derive it from the math to be able to exploit the whole "theology" of the numbers. Universal system like the braids group, or the unitary group, might solve this, but we cannot use them directly, we have to derived them from the comp mind- body constraints.




So we are (mostly) still "in the same universe", and so we can interact with and affect the consciousness of other people.

Hopefully. The existence of 3 different sort of physical realities seems to give sense to a pretension of salvia (i), which is that a form of plural first person reality might still exists "near and after clinical death". this is not obvious. A priori, with comp, we might surivive in solipsist state, but apparently, there are entities with which we can communicate. In fact our own consciousness here and now, seems to involve many internal dialog and interaction. Note that no Boltzman brain can ever implement a UD, nor even arbitrary part of UD*, which involves very long and stable computations. Eventually the "simple" but global and complete arithmetical reality is a very highly structured reality.

Bruno



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.
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 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.

Reply via email to