On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 3:39 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
> On 11 Jan 2014, at 14:05, Terren Suydam wrote:
> Hi Bruno,
>> Unfortunately I don't have enough familiarity with the math to follow you
>> here. It is something I'd like to become fluent in one of these days but
>> unfortunately I barely have enough time these days to read this list.
>> OK. Good book are Mendelson, Boolos and Jeffrey (and Burgess), etc.
> Unfortunately they asks for a lot ow work. Logic is the less known branch
> of math. The beginning *seems* easy, but is not (unlike computability
> However one thing still nags me. I don't find it hard to imagine that
>> given enough computational power, we could simulate a universe with
>> alternative physics, that leads within the simulation to intelligent,
>> conscious life forms, eventually.
>> The simulated agent will be conscious in the 3-1 sense, but we will have
> to "manipulate them infinitely" to fail them. Indeed they can read and
> think like us, do the UD-Argument, and find the comp-physics, and compare
> it with their artificial physics, and their choice will be that either they
> are indeed in a normal simulation, or that comp is false. But we will have
> ourself an infinite task to fail them. If not they will soon or later find
> the discrepancies.
I don't see why... see below.
> So Glak appears in our simulation. And if we can simulate it, well, it's
>> already in the UD*, as well as the infinite computations going through
>> Glak's state.
>> Bur from their own 1-1 points of view, they are in the UD*, and will
> follow the path with the greater measure.
> They will not "stay" in the simulation. That will happen only in our 3-1
> view (or 1-3-1 views).
> The only way I can resolve this with your reply is that I fear you have
>> to say conscious beings cannot exist in alternative physics simulations,
>> but I'd love to be wrong here.
>> They can, from our points of view, but they will find themselves in the
> most common computations in the UD* which pass through their states.
> Those people stays in the simulation, only from our points of view, and
> this asks infinite word from our part if we want them to stay failed by our
> simulation. Their situation is similar with the stochastically rare witness
> of a quantum suicide surviver. He survived with probability 1, from their
> own view, but with probability near 0 for their witness (in iterated
> quantum suicides).
If we are able to simulate a universe with alternate physics that gives
rise to Glak (and there may be an infinity of different such universes),
then that simulation exists in the UD*. And of course, the UD* also
contains an infinity of continuations simulating that alternative physics,
and of course Glak. So it's not clear to me that the measure of that
alternative physics would be so small as to make it obvious that the
alternative physics would be a "white rabbit world".
> 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.