On 25 Jan 2014, at 14:05, Richard Ruquist wrote:
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 6:22 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 24 Jan 2014, at 23:12, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/24/2014 12:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
In your aristotelian theology. But when working on the mind-body
problem, it is better to abandon all prejudices on this. Indeed with
comp, it is the concrete laptop which appears as an (unconscious
preprogrammed) idealization.
Of course I'd say reifying arithmetic is a prejudice.
No need in reifying it. You need just to believe in their truth.
For some people, like Hardy, the number 8 is more concrete that the
planets you can count. Our brain makes us believe the contrary, but
he uses a complex universal machine to fail us on this.
Yes I appreciate this viewpoint. Actually I'm pretty agnostic about
what's really real. At any given time it's the ontology of our best
theory; where "best" is not sharply defined but is measured by some
mixture of predictive power, consilience, scope, definiteness, and
accuracy.
OK.
Comp is great on scope and maybe on definiteness, but it seems very
weak on the other measures.
I am not sure. If comp is correct, and if there is no flaw in UDA,
comp predicts the existence of physical laws. I don't know of any
other theory doing that. And it is constructive, we get already the
quantum logic, and they have to define the whole measure, by the UDA.
Bruno,
In string theory the physical laws and constants depend on how the
hyper-EM flux winds thru the (500 or so) topo holes in the Calabi-
Yau compact manifolds (ie., particles of 6d space).
OK. What is an hyper-EM? (Hyper means ?)
That may constitute a prediction of the laws and constants except
that the relationship between the laws and particular windings in
not known (but the same may be true of comp).
Interesting.
String theory is a physical theory which makes me envisage that number
theory might be the measure winner. There are many formal similarities
suggesting this, but I can't really judge, and only the theological
approach (with G*) preserves the first person/thrid person relation in
a way enlightnening for an explanation of the quanta/qualia relation.
Bruno
Richard
It is fuzzy on the precise frontier between geography and physics,
but it explains at least the difference, which is not even existing
in physics, except by a vague inference. Comp explains the maning of
"aw" in "physical laws".
That's why I keep hoping you'll be able to come up with some
surprising testable prediction.
It is really a question of making people understanding the S4Grz, X
and Z logics. The math is there. Just technical difficulties, to sum
up. It is for the next generation.
This is just standard science. It's not some Aristotelean
prejudice. It's the same thing we ask of string theory and loop-
quantum-gravity.
You mention that you think octonion Hilbert space will be found to
be more fundamental than complex Hilbert space. Of course many
people have speculated that quaternions or octonions will be more
fundamental, but nothing definite has been predicted. So if comp
showed that the octonions were necessary that would be quite
convincing.
Unfortunately my intuition does not come from comp, here. I would
have like that too, but now, that would be wishful thinking.
But you should understand that we have no choice. If comp is
correct, and if we don't put consciousness under the rug, the
*whole* of physics is a theorem in arithmetic, concerning what any
universal machine can predict from any of its states (even in
simulation). Comp gives new strong invariants for physics: the
choice of phi_i, and the choice of the observer in the phi_i.
That's the main point: an explanation that no theory of
consciousness can avoid a derivation of the physical reality
appearances from arithmetic or equivalent.
It seems from the little I know that comp at most predicts 8
different variations of laws and constants whereas string theory
predicts at different variation for every unique winding, which may
be as many as 10^1000 different variations. Perhaps that is
testable. Richard
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 [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.
--
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.
