"But with comp the laws of physics are uniquely determined by a
statistical sum on an infinity of computations"
Uniquely determined? That is like saying that The Buckingham Palace
is uniquely determined by the statistical sum of a infinity of pieces
of lego thrown in the site by infinite B52 bombers.
2014/1/9, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be>:
> On 08 Jan 2014, at 23:53, LizR wrote:
>> On 9 January 2014 11:40, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> On 1/7/2014 10:36 PM, LizR wrote:
>> Max's main lacuna is the nature of consciousness, which he describes
>> as "what data feels like when it's being processed" - hardly a
>> detailed theory. He starts his Mathematical Universe Hypothesis from
>> the opposite pole to Bruno, so to speak. I wonder if it's possible
>> for a particular mathemathical object to drop out of comp - after
>> all, we do appear to live in a universe with a specific set of laws
>> of physics. Are these the only ones that could be generated by comp
>> (or generated by the existence of conscious beings in Platonia) ?
>> Maybe one needs to somehow intersect comp with the MUH to get the
>> full story!
>> I think to be conscious you need memory and a sense of time passage
>> (although Bruno disputes this when he comes back from a salvia
>> trip). To escape solipism there must be objects your perceive, some
>> of which act like you, and on which you can act (c.f. Dr Johnson).
>> That implies that there must be a quasi-classical world in order to
>> support consciousness (at least human-like consciousness).
>> Those all seem like reasonable criteria. I imagine they could be
>> fulfilled by a variety of physical laws (e.g. it probably wouldn't
>> make a huge difference to the existence of human beings if light
>> travelled 10% faster or slower). So presumably comp covers all
>> possible physical laws which create conscious beings...
> But with comp the laws of physics are uniquely determined by a
> statistical sum on an infinity of computations, and is unique (modulo
> that multiplication by three, as physics appears in three hypostases).
> And the determination is based on the FPI, and so physics is NOT a
> priori Turing emulable. The evidence that physics seems computable is
> a problem for comp, not an evidence for it. Fortunately the *apparent*
> "collapse" might be non-computable enough for comp to be correct.
> 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 firstname.lastname@example.org.
> 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 post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.