On 15 Jan 2014, at 13:36, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
Bruno,
Thanks for the correction.
But it's still just as bad to claim all arithmetic just sits there
in 'Platonia'.
I use only the fact that the arithmetical proposition is true of
false. It is the belief that 1+1=3 is false or true, independently of
me, or of the working of my brain, or from the working of some
possible physical universe.
You use that implicitly when you refer to the quantum vacuum. There is
no science without it (pace H. Field)
You still don't address the problem of how anything happens, and how
the universe gets computed.
?
I do. UDA explains (only) why we have no choice in that matter (once
we bet that the brain is Turing emulable), and AUDA makes the math
verification, and proposes the experimental devices to test the
propositional physics already derived (including both quanta and
qualia (accepting some definition).
PGC said that you should read a text, before criticizing it. I think
that it is a wise remark, if not "obvious".
When you study a theory by another, you should better forget your own,
momentarily.
I know you claim that somehow movement is an illusion of perspective
from inside the system which sounds like the nonsensical 'block
time' universe,
I agree that its sounds like nonsense, but the earth is not flat
sounded also like nonsense, radio waves sounded like nonsense. you
cannot speculate on a possible contradiction to refute a theory, you
must show the contradiction.
which no matter how many protest, is riddled with contradictions and
lacunas....
Show one, without invoking "obviousness", or equivalent.
Bruno
Edgar
On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 3:04:30 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 14 Jan 2014, at 18:48, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
Liz,
Correct. Most reality math is likely fairly simple and fairly
limited. That's why Bruno's 'comp' that assumes all math exists out
there somewhere is so extraordinarily wrong and excessive and non-
parsimonious.
I will stop comment, if you repeat false allegation already
corrected in previous posts.
I do not assume all math exists out there. Only arithmetic. "all
math" is an expression having no precise meaning. It means nothing,
actually.
Now, if you believe that "29 is prime" does depend on you, show me
the functional relation between "29 is prime" and "you", with "you"
defined without using the notion of numbers.
Bruno
As for the grid cells on the GR rubber sheet model just imagine a
mass-energy content in one cell dilating it. That automatically
produces a curvature in the rubber sheet around that mass-energy
consistent with the effects of space curvature in GR.
Edgar
On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 12:52:24 AM UTC-5, Liz R wrote:
On 14 January 2014 16:49, Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]> wrote:
Liz,
Sure, the particle property conservation laws that conserve the
amounts of particle properties in elementary particle interactions,
and the laws that govern the binding of elementary particles in
matter. These are the fundamental computations that determine most
of the structure of the universe....
OK, but I would imagine most conservations laws don't require much
computation - aren't they more akin to storing (i.e. conserving)
data?
How and where is the code stored? There is no 'where' in a non-
dimensional computational space. How it is stored I intimated in an
earlier response of an hour or so ago. It's stored as combinations
of code and data in the actual process of evolving computationally.
I don't understand what you mean by the code and data are stored
"in the process of evolving computationally"
How do the computations decide what data they will interact with?
The computations include the data they compute in one information
structure as explained above.
Where does that data come from? Is there any interaction between
adjacent computations? (Are there such things as adjacent
computations? If there isn't, how does locality emerge?)
What grid cells? Aren't you familiar with the standard rubber sheet
model of GR? The rubber sheet has grid cells drawn on it.
The grid cells drawn in embedding diagrams are there to show the
metrical properties of space-time, while the computations you're
talking about are, I believe, what generates space-time. I don't
(as yet) see an obvious connection between the two.
--
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.
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 [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.
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 [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.
