2014/1/21 Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]> > Bruno, > > Again you avoid the question. You need to give everyone a clear and > convincing reason in English. >
As we say in french "C'est l'hôpital qui se fout de la charité"... Quentin > 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 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. > -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy Batty/Rutger Hauer) -- 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.
