On 18 Jan 2014, at 05:16, meekerdb wrote:

On 1/17/2014 5:40 PM, LizR wrote:But apparently the brain has a lot to do with those computations inPlatonia, c.f. anesthetic. Notice that I'm not a disciple ofPlatonia.Me neither, I am agnostic - but within comp it is assumed, so whilediscussing comp we have to assume it (unless we're rejecting compon that basis). But I can see that Platonia makes sense in that 17does seem to be prime idependently of you and me and everyone else,which is (I'm told) enough for the whole shebang to come into somesort of existence.I don't think you have to buy the equivalence between (17 is prime)is true and (17 is prime) exists. In fact Bruno always says youonly have to believe the first for his argument to succeed.

Yes.

`I am not even sure that "(17 is prime) exists" make sense. Unless you`

`mean by "(17 is prime)" something like a sentence or symbol sequence.`

`That exists in arithmetic too, but is not necessarily related to the`

`fact that 17 is prime. The utterance of "18 is prime" exists also in`

`arithmetic, and is true, actually, for all entities which denote the`

`number 17 by the string "18".`

But then he slips in the UD and it seems that every truth ofarithmetic implies and existence.

?

`Only (trivially) the truth of existential statement. "Ex prime(x)" is`

`true, entails that a prime number exists.`

`We accept the first order logical rule that if some P(n) is true (that`

`is P(sssssss...sss(0)) can be proved in RA, or PA, then ExP(x) is true.`

I think this is the same problem as step 8. If everything has to besimulated, then there's no difference between simulated and real.

`But the physics is never simulated. Only the dreams are. On the`

`contrary, physics has to be recovered from the FPI on all simulations`

`done in arithmetic. It is a priori not computable, and precisely must`

`contain one non simulable aspect (like the direct result of the FPI).`

If I'm "really" existing in an infinity of world/simulations thatare *just like this one up to now* - then they ARE this one (c.f.Leibniz).

`OK, but the point is that you are in an infinity of simulations, but`

`what you can predict (physics) depends on all of them at once, by the`

`FPI invariance of the number of steps done by the UD (or the length of`

`proofs in RA) to get your comp state.`

`This explains entirely (assuming comp!) the origin of the physical`

`laws, and why they differentiate into many worlds, and even more`

`geographico-historical threads.`

Bruno 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.