Dear Edgar, We can get to the root of the obstruction, perhaps, is the nature of perception. If perception, physically speaking, is the mere matching between some bit of the world to some bit in the brain (or whatever is running the recursively enumerable functions) then this would match up with the Block Universe concept. The representational (or numerical or computational) picture would involve a mapping between identical bits in a way that is parallel to the physical picture. If, on the other hand, there is some form of irreducible transitional action required for perception then both the Platonic notions and the Block Universe have a fatal flaw. Real world computations do not occur in zero time. There is a delay. In the case of humans this delay has been measured to be between 50 and 100 milliseconds. The world you perceive is an image of the world up to 100ms in the past. There is evidence for irreducible time in perception. Cogito ergo eram: I think, therefore I was.
Computing the universe separately, as you propose, does not solve this obstruction in the nature of perception. On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Edgar L. Owen <edgaro...@att.net> wrote: > Bruno, > > Again you avoid the question. You need to give everyone a clear and > convincing reason in English. Just requoting some abstract mathematical > proof won't suffice unless you can prove it actually applies. If there is > really a way to get motion from stasis you should be able to simply state > the core of the argument in plain English. > > There simply is no way to get motion from non-motion, either in your > theory or in block time....You can look at it from any perspective you want > to but unless something moves nothing moves... > > Of course you can use the same 'cop out' that block time does when it > claims that an observer in every static frame of block time perceives a > sequence of events, but that doesn't work to move anything. It's still just > a sequence of cartoon frames which are obviously completely static. A > static motionless observer sees them as a motionless sequence. Only an > ACTIVELY MOVING reader of the cartoon can provide the apparent sequence of > the cartoon frames that makes them meaningful. But of course actually both > observer and universe are actively moving as they are continually being > recomputed in the present moment of p-time.... > > If the sequence seems to move it's only because that cartoon reader is > already moving himself. So without a moving observer rather than a static > "1p" observer, to use your terminology, there can be no motion. Unless the > 1p observer is himself alive and moving there can be no motion in his > perspective. There is simply no way around that. > > > Edgar > > > On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:27:59 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> On 21 Jan 2014, at 17:34, Edgar L. Owen wrote: >> >> Bruno, >> >> You continue to avoid the actual question. How does a static reality of >> all true arithmetic in Platonia actually result in change and the flow of >> time? You just claim "everyone knows it". >> >> >> Where. I just said (see below) that "everybody knows it" is never an >> argument. You misread me. On the contrary I said that I can explain it, but >> then it is long. Then, I point on the literature, and mention that the fact >> that arithmetic is Turing complete is known by experts. >> >> Do you agree that arithmetic emulates all computations? I guess not. >> >> >> >> Until you can give a convincing answer to that your theory can't be taken >> seriously..... >> >> >> By who? I have never have any problem with that. On the contrary, most >> physicists already believe that the theory of relativity go in that >> direction (even more so in Gödel's solution of Einstein's GR equation, with >> looping time. >> >> I can give you an answer, except I am not sure you will study it. I will >> explain it to you when you answer the questions I asked about your theory. >> What does it assume, and how do you use it to prevent the UD Argument to >> proceed? >> >> >> >> >> Just claiming that different observers have different perspectives on >> that reality doesn't make those perspectives active, they would still be >> static. >> >> >> Seen from the big picture (arithmetical truth) you are right. Seen from >> the perspective of the internal creatures, you are wrong, at least in the >> sense, that those creatures have all reason to infer time and space, etc. >> They will talk about that like you and me. >> >> Do you think that a machine can distinguish "being a living person >> inhabiting on Earth", and "being a living person on Earth" emulated on some >> computer, or in arithmetic. >> >> >> And of course block time has the exact same problem.... >> >> >> "of course" is a symptom of lack of argument. >> >> You are just looking at the 3p picture, and not at the 1p views of the >> entities in that 3p reality. You could as well say that a brain has no >> relation with consciousness, as there is no 1p sensations observed when we >> look at a brain. But comp associates consciousness, including consciousness >> of time to the 1p that we can as >> ... > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/everything-list/TBc_y2MZV5c/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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. > -- Kindest Regards, Stephen Paul King Senior Researcher Mobile: (864) 567-3099 stephe...@provensecure.com http://www.provensecure.us/ “This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may be constituted as attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, notify sender immediately and delete this message immediately.” -- 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.
